Civil Disobedience under certain circumstances, unethical or moral obligation?

[Robofan]

If no law is being broken, and only a policy with no guidelines or practical method of enforcement that you find to be directly in opposition your rights as a citizen, but not necessarily to one directly mentioned in the Bible, is it unethical or your moral obligation to challenge that policy?

While this could be applied to many different policies on both the Federal, State, and local levels, the one I've gotten sort of worked up over is the new Safe Zones.

Personally, I see it as a direct infringement on my right to free speech. I do see the legal ramification that one could claim that my remarks emotionally scarred them causing them to lose future revenue, but at the same time it basically says that instead of someone having to go to their close friends that support them so they can be around people that won't say anything they find offensive, now everyone has to be friends and get along or big brother steps in... It seems like like if they put up a safe zone sign, they're basically telling me, "You can agree with us or leave government and public property..."

 

[Paidiske]

More information needed. Specifics?

 

[Winken]

If no law is being broken, and only a policy with no guidelines or practical method of enforcement that you find to be directly in opposition your rights as a citizen, but not necessarily to one directly mentioned in the Bible, is it unethical or your moral obligation to challenge that policy?

A little more insight, please.......

 

[Moxie123]

If no law is being broken, and only a policy with no guidelines or practical method of enforcement that you find to be directly in opposition your rights as a citizen, but not necessarily to one directly mentioned in the Bible, is it unethical or your moral obligation to challenge that policy?

While this could be applied to many different policies on both the Federal, State, and local levels, the one I've gotten sort of worked up over is the new Safe Zones.

Personally, I see it as a direct infringement on my right to free speech. I do see the legal ramification that one could claim that my remarks emotionally scarred them causing them to lose future revenue, but at the same time it basically says that instead of someone having to go to their close friends that support them so they can be around people that won't say anything they find offensive, now everyone has to be friends and get along or big brother steps in... It seems like like if they put up a safe zone sign, they're basically telling me, "You can agree with us or leave government and public property..."

I see what you're asking: if there's no harm, injury or loss done to another man or his property by your free speech, can one apply civil disobedience on a ban of free speech? Yes you can.

Because whichever man or woman protests your free speech must prove harm, injury or loss. They usually can't; however, you would have to learn how to pursue that from start to finish.

Prayer in public school comes to mind.

 

[SteveB28]

I see what you're asking: if there's no harm, injury or loss done to another man or his property by your free speech, can one apply civil disobedience on a ban of free speech? Yes you can.

Because whichever man or woman protests your free speech must prove harm, injury or loss. They usually can't; however, you would have to learn how to pursue that from start to finish.

Prayer in public school comes to mind.

How does prayer inhibit your free speech? I'm not sure I understand you.

 

[Moxie123]

How does prayer inhibit your free speech? I'm not sure I understand you.

Because prayer groups are banned during public school hours.

 

[jacks]

"Safe Zones" The idea is good, but it has gotten very militant and there is no "S" (straight) in LGBTQ. Further if you had a Christian perspective you definitely wouldn't be safe from ridicule. If they were truly zones where everyone was (really) welcome and diverse ideas could freely be explored then they might have some value.

 

[SteveB28]

Because prayer groups are banned during public school hours.

Are you sure about that?

 

[bhsmte]

Because prayer groups are banned during public school hours.

Are you not free to pray in your church and on your free time?

 

[Freodin]

I see what you're asking: if there's no harm, injury or loss done to another man or his property by your free speech, can one apply civil disobedience on a ban of free speech? Yes you can.

Because whichever man or woman protests your free speech must prove harm, injury or loss. They usually can't; however, you would have to learn how to pursue that from start to finish.

Prayer in public school comes to mind.

Satanic masses in churches comes to mind.

Harm? No.
Injury? No.
Loss? No.

Ok... it would be private property. You would be in your rights to prohibit such a behaviour in the place of "your close friends".

So... satanic masses in schools, public plazas, courthouses... congress?
Why do Christians do everything in their power to prevent that?

 

[Dave-W]

How does prayer inhibit your free speech? I'm not sure I understand you.

Ask the witches we bound up by prayer in the church I attended back in 1980.
All kinds of things can be stopped by prayer.

 

[SteveB28]

Ask the witches we bound up by prayer in the church I attended back in 1980.
All kinds of things can be stopped by prayer.

Pardon?