If you are wanting to deny ignorance, then ignorance must have a voice. Otherwise, this marketplace of ideas becomes a platform for ATS to decide
what speech is to be heard and what speech is not to be heard. Truth can only rise by its reflection to the ignorance standing beside it. One rises
and the other falls on its face. Take away the reflection and you get a false image created by ATS moderators who become the thought police of the
image. Imperfection allows room for the clear image to stand as transparent. This is the beauty of a place like ATS. For every ignorant
perspective, there are those who stand against it with truth. I realize the intention, but intent would be better served to the members of ATS by
allowing the market forces of ideas to work themselves out by the Law of Inverse Squares.
There is a difference between intention and intent. Intention is a hope. Intent is action by design. If you take the wrong action, you risk
unintended consequences that could destroy the value here. The beauty of ATS, when I first arrived here as SuperiorEd, was the fact that this was an
open forum of ideas. After being shut down for having a username that resembled my Blog and for posting MY OWN WORDS from my blog, I witnessed this
stifling of speech first hand. The rule on posting my own material was meant for me it seems. I witness it done on a daily basis by others and they
are still here. Why me? I'll tell you why me.
Let's be clear on the matter. I was banned as SuperiorEd the same weekend I posted truth over ignorance in two threads about Freemason deception on
the world. I was then banned on Valentine's Day (Martyr's Day) after revealing the truth behind the Orphan Annie Cartoon. Will you be deleting that
thread as well?
There is a saying: If you can't take the heat, don't tickle the dragon. ATS is a forum for tickling the dragon. Embrace the idea and own your
rightful spot as an open forum for the free exchange of ideas. I defer to Oliver Wendell Holmes.
On my Blog (The one I am not aloud to mention on ATS), I wrote an article that was titled, "Sticky Thoughts that Stretch the Mind." The article was
based on a quote from Oliver Wendell Holmes regarding a court case that stifled the free speech of three men and sentenced them to 20 years in prison.
Since ATS has banned the use of my own words from my blog, I'll need to write this again in a different way. Here's the quote:
“A mind that is stretched by a new experience can never go back to its old dimensions.”
This is a reference to hypertrophy (hī-ˈpər-trə-fē), or stretching muscle to gain size and strength. This stretching of the mind happens in a
free marketplace of ideas where market forces dictate the worth of an idea. In essence, the people vote with their own minds, intellect and sense of
the world around them. You may not like or appreciate the ideas, but you will grow because of them by reflection to your own perspective. The
exercise stretches the mind. This allows growth that would otherwise rest dormant.
I'll also defer to Holmes on another quote:
"The ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas...that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted
in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out. That at any rate is the theory
of our Constitution. It is an experiment, as all life is an experiment. Every year if not every day we have to wager our salvation upon some
prophecy based upon imperfect knowledge. While that experiment is part of our system I think that we should be eternally vigilant against attempts to
check the expression of opinions that we loathe and believe to be fraught with death, unless they so imminently threaten immediate interference with
the lawful and pressing purposes of the law that an immediate check is required to save the country.”
Did you catch that? "we should be eternally vigilant against attempts to check the expression of opinions that we loathe and believe to be fraught
with death, unless they so imminently threaten immediate interference with the lawful and pressing purposes of the law that an immediate check is
required to save the country."
I say an immediate check is required on our Congress and President when it comes to freedom and liberty. I can say that, cant' I? Or can I ATS? Is
that hate speech? It's truth to me. If it's not to you, don't ban me for saying it with the evidence from the Bible. Will the Bible be banned as
well? Where is the line drawn? Provide your own context and live with my perspective or change it with your own. Have you checked the status of our
freedom lately? Are you joining them or standing against this ignorance?
edit on 3-4-2012 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)