Pacquiao's (or anyone's) Right To Free Speech OR The Hurt Feelings Of Gay People?

[fanofslug]

like Pac won vs Floyd LOL

it is passing thru the first stage.

Pacquiao has far more exciting fights we can all rewatch again and again unlike your boring Mayweather.

[Rath]

it wasn't. people just like to say that when they have no argument.

it was not, yet, but after this backlash it will.

[original zero]

after all of this protest and lobbying by LGBT it will.

level of education and IQ seems obvious now

So you're complaining because you predict his free speech will be infringed in the future even though it hasn't been? Right . . .

I've already stated my IQ and level of education. My IQ is 155 and I went to college when I was 11. You like to throw the word genius around as an insult but where I come from, intelligence is nothing to be ashamed of.

Yet for some reason, you're too embarrassed to admit your age and intellectual credentials. You have the logical processing of a petulant child. And you very well may be one, which maybe is why you continue to deflect.

[fanofslug]

Also there have been dozens of threads now on this issue and the majority of the polls support Pacquiao yet all the posts are by people who support ****s, which just proves no one likes ****s but are too afraid to speak up and what we're seeing right now is the loud minority....that's right....you FAAGS are the MINORITY.....the majority are just quiet for now because of their livelihoods....God Bless Pacquiao for risking his millions and speaking the truth

[AllEyesOpen]

Pacquiao has the right to live his faith, and speak his mind. The LGBT community has the right to disagree and take action by not supporting him.

[The Big Dunn]

Which one deserves to be protected and preserved above and beyond all:

Pacquiao's, or any civilian's, right to free speech..

Or

The hurt feelings of gay people ?

Bearing in mind, gays can only express their dismay about Pacquiao's comments because they have the right to free speech too. A right they seem to be aiming to take away from Pacquiao through the recent attacks on his otherwise good character.

While I disagree with Pacquiao calling gays "animals" in the context he used it, he does have the right to express his opinion. He is unfortunately a bible-basher and religions cause people to adopt all sorts of strange, unusual and irrational beliefs.

But, put in another context, we are all animals since we are descended from primates. Of course Pac didn't mean it that way, but there's a possible get out clause I'll give to him if he desires to use it, on the proviso of course that he agrees to fight Khan next.

Pacquiao is wrong about the animal kingdom not having examples of gays. Just one example among many is that it's known there are gay and lesbian dolphins, to the point that the lesbian dolphins have developed a specialized mating call which are directed specifically to other females exclusively. Strange but true.

But, I digress..

What's more important - preserving Pacquiao's right to free speech or protecting the delicate sensibilities of gays and lesbians?

Does the Constitution in the Phillipines give every person the right to free speech? If so, I think that should be protected. I expect some people to not agree or be hurt by what is said. Those hurt should then exercise their right to free speech to respond.

[goblin213]

Does the Constitution in the Phillipines give every person the right to free speech? If so, I think that should be protected. I expect some people to not agree or be hurt by what is said. Those hurt should then exercise their right to free speech to respond.

Didn't they try to ban Justin Bieber from the Philippines for mocking Pac?
And that one former NBA player was fined and got fired by the Philippine team for criticizing Pac.

[Citizen Koba]

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

Intolerance and prejudice are the issues here - a matter of principle far beyond 'the hurt feelings of gay people' as the TS blithely puts it. If it's OK to restrict the rights of gay people why is it not OK to restrict the rights of Blacks or Chinese or Fat People or ethically challenged internet boxing nerds?

[Rath]

So you're complaining because you predict his free speech will be infringed in the future even though it hasn't been? Right . . .

I've already stated my IQ and level of education. My IQ is 155 and I went to college when I was 11. You like to throw the word genius around as an insult but where I come from, intelligence is nothing to be ashamed of.

Yet for some reason, you're too embarrassed to admit your age and intellectual credentials. You have the logical processing of a petulant child. And you very well may be one, which maybe is why you continue to deflect.

kindergarten insult does not work for me.

what LGBT is doing lobbying for Pac's endorsement deals to be cut off and restaurants and hotels banning him will result to Pac not speaking anymore about his opinion towards LGBT.

he said something about LGBT exercising his right to free speech quoting bibles verses when he fought Bradley the first time.

the backlash was not this much then so he exercise his right to free speech again.

i am right when i said Pac's right to free speech is infringed after the thiis recent backlash if Pac never said anything about LGBT from now on.

and you can only say you were right if for some reason Pac said something again against LGBT from now on.

see the logic?

i am not embarassed to answer oall your inquiries, but i made some conditions.

fulfill that condition and you will have your answer.

by the way how can i confirm what you said was true you went to college at age 11?

I went to college at age 5 with my uncle, what's your point. LOL

level of education IQ seems obvious now.

[original zero]

"what LGBT is doing lobbying for Pac's endorsement deals to be cut off and restaurants and hotels banning him will result to Pac not speaking anymore about his opinion towards LGBT."

That still doesn't violate his free speech rights. You clearly have no understanding of what free speech is.

If people figure out that you're an ******* and don't want to buy your products anymore, that's not infringing on free speech. That's your free speech making you a terrible choice as an endorser.