Not being dead, I suppose.
Win. 
Hypothetical: You have a teenage female relative. She’s visiting a friend, and the friend takes her to a club in a very sketchy part of town, downplaying the risks and dangers, and encouraging her to dress in sexy clothes. Your female relative is assaulted outside the club.
Now obviously the assaulter is 100% guilty of the crime of assault and ought to be punished. But are you saying that because the friend did not have the intent of causing assault, you would not in the slightest bit blame the friend for what happened? I find that a bit hard to believe.
So if people think women should be covered head to toe then we do what exactly?
Nobody is luring Reverend Jones into anything. It’s his choice to fling rhetoric as he sees fit.
Hopefully the question is not his free speech but rather his insistence that others listen. I don’t think all space (that is not private) is by it’s existence a forum for free speech. The function of a street is not the same as a park or a sidewalk. Even with the functions of streets there are limitations based on the type of street. We zone public space based on it’s intended use and as such their use should dictate the balance between free speech and public nuisance. The streets and sidewalks in front of a private residence are there to move cars and pedestrians. They are not zoned for commerce any more than a highway is nor are they zoned as a platform to project the exchange of ideas beyond the exchange between willing participants.
The Preamble to the Constitution talks about tranquility and the promotion of general welfare. The rights embodied in the Constitution were not designed as a winner-take-all force to be used against other rights and as a direct connection against each other. The right to speak freely among ourselves is not a blank check right to force others to listen against their will and in deference of a right to live peaceably.
How could you possibly have gotten that from what I wrote?
In my analogy, Reverend Jones is the one acting with disregard for the consequences of his actions, ie, the friend of the relative.
Nothing I said has anything to do with free speech.
There are a few things that you legally can be restricted from saying (ie, invasion of privacy, incitement, slander). There are many more things that you have the legal right to say but which might have consequences that you will bear moral-if-not-legal responsibility for, and this discussion (as much as it’s about any one thing) is to what extent Pastor Jones’ speech falls into that category.
…of jackassery.
How so? :rolleyes:
Still waiting for Magiver to craft an argument against this assertion with a bit of pocket lint and whimsical turn of phrase. 
Jackassery is the foundation of freedom (and politics). In fact, it’s use as a party symbol was in defiance of the opinion of opponents of the day.
[:mad:
] getting your Charlie Sheen tickets for pennies on the dollar so you can openly mock him, priceless
Well I guess that about sums sit up then. Jones’ flavor of jackassery earns him moral responsibility for the evil it engenders. And that is all well and good, as one of the pillars of modern democracy and freedom, held in high esteem as an example to be emulated by all democrats.
Did I get that right? Close enough?
No. You’ve gotten nothing right. There was nothing evil about what Jones did. Evil is killing someone. Evil is giving a sermon that whips people into a killing frenzy. Jones did not do that. That evil was propagated by people 8000 miles away in Afghanistan. They did this in the name of their religion. There is no scale to measure what they did.
Between heaven and hell dwells the soul of man. How he treats his fellow travel determines both origin and destination. The people of Afghanistan create the world in which they live in and not the Reverend Jones.
Apparently you hadn’t noticed we’re all living in the same “world?” 
Not really. the people in Afghanistan are living about 5 centuries behind the rest of the world.
Must that old 1st gen Internet, I 'spose.
Sure didn’t take ‘em long to start killin’ people after Jones had his little book burning party, did it? :rolleyes:
No it didn’t. That’s what backward evil people do. they kill for no reason.