🚀 go-pugleaf

>The real issue is that there's a person spouting opinions that we don't
>agree with and it's best to use any means whatsoever to have him silenced!

What form of protest against Clay would you suggest?

It seems to me that "REAL men" is simply expressing their opinion that
Clay's comments are offensive and have a negative effect on our society.
I have no problem with that.  Note that they are *not* advocating
censorship.

Here's another scenario: let's say there's a neo-Nazi speaking at the
local Elks Lodge (no, I'm not suggesting the Elks would invite him).
People decide to protest outside, saying that Nazi ideas lead to 
oppression and murder.  They further suggest that anyone endorsing
Nazism should be shunned.  Is there anything wrong with this?  I
don't think so.

Free speech isn't just about allowing offensive people to speak.  It also
permits peaceful rebuttals to the statements that an offensive person
makes.

     Bob Alexander                                     boba@pictel.com
       The more the government does, the better libertarianism looks
     -----------------------------------------------------------------
     Organizations don't have opinions; people do.  The above opinions
     do not reflect those of the directors, stockholders, managers, or
     other employees of PictureTel.