In my article entitled; "RESPECTING" A VERDICT. I wrote the following: "RESPECTING" A VERDICT, LEGALLY, MAKES NO MORAL/ETHICAL JUDGEMENT ON THE JUSTICE OR INJUSTICE OF THE DECISION HANDED DOWN. ALL IT MEANS IS:
THAT YOU WILL OBEY THAT PART OF LAW IMPACTED BY THE DECISION, AND NOT ACT CONTRARY TO LEGAL PRECEDENT SET FORTH IN THE VERDICT, REGARDLESS OF YOUR OWN PERSONAL OPINION(S).
In addition, Americans often use the term "RESPECT" when discussing Individual Rights guaranteed by the U.S. CONSTITUTION. In actuality, the Word that best defines such a conversation is;
TOLERATE: allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that one does not necessarily like or agree with) without interference.
TOLERANCE is the Constitutional Guarantee that protects Individual Rights from being Unjustifiably Limited/Ignored by Government, Business, or other Individuals.
RESPECT- As it is normally used in everyday conversation, typically means one of the following definitions:
- a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements.
- due regard for the feelings, wishes, rights, or traditions of others.
The point? Read the following:
NO WE DON'T. BY LAW, WE HAVE TO TOLERATE IT. THEY CANNOT BE PUNISHED FOR PROTECTED SPEECH, HOWEVER...
...RESPECT IT? IN NO WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM.
So for all those out there who realize that much of the GOP IS LITTLE MORE THAN A COLLECTION OF FASCIST HATEMONGERS WHO HAVE SOLD OUT THE CONSTITUTION LONG AGO, DO NOT USE "RESPECT" IN REFERRING TO ANYTHING THEY HAVE SAID, OR WILL SAY.
THEY DON'T DESERVE IT.
*AS I HAVE POINTED OUT IN OTHER ARTICLES, THERE IS NO "ABSOLUTE RIGHT" OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH. THERE ARE MANY EXAMPLES OF "SPEECH" THAT VIOLATE CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LAW.
