Liberals need to stop messing with the First Amendment

[demi-conservative]

Yep, which was my point. SoR was assuming a basic level of knowledge on your part, which is always a mistake when dealing with you.

Not knowing what libtards are freaking out about in past day or two is a blessing, Starlight!!

[Cow Poke]

Yep, which was my point. SoR was assuming a basic level of knowledge on your part, which is always a mistake when dealing with you.

A "basic level of knowledge"? Wow....

I saw an article on free speech that interested me - had NOTHING to do with "MAGA".

You guys jumped headlong to a false conclusion, and I bet NEITHER of you has the common decency to admit you made a mistake.

[Sea of red]

I come to the defense of anybody holding peaceful demonstrations while being violently assaulted by leftists like you. You're a scumbag of the highest order.

Coming from a person regarded by many on this site as a demented neo-fascist, I'll take this as a badge of honor.

[Cow Poke]

Um, hate to break it to you, but that example was given by a judge in a case that was subsequently overturned. Chances are pretty good today's supreme court would unanimously rule that the expansive interpretation of the first amendment currently in fashion means shouting "fire" in a crowded theater is constitutionally protected free speech.

Um, I hate to break it to you, but some judge being overturned in American jurisprudence is no real indicator of all what SCOTUS would or would not do. You, again, show your profound ignorance of the American legal system.

[Cow Poke]

2. The next day CP posts a thread saying liberals are the real problem not Nazis.

I'm going to demand that you defend this stinking piece of garbage, or leave the thread. I just re-read the article -- where does it indicate that "liberals are the real problem not Nazis"?

[Sea of red]

I'm going to demand that you defend this stinking piece of garbage, or leave the thread. I just re-read the article -- where does it indicate that "liberals are the real problem not Nazis"?

Now you're just creating a straw man.

Nobody said the article stated "liberals are the problem", or anything like that. I made the observation that your priorities are screwed-up if after violent protest by Nazi's, you are going to beat the same old dead horse that liberals are silencing free speech.

[hedrick]

You are aware that the 1st amendment doesn't apply in Germany, right?

Many European countries outlaw hate speech. I disagree, and so do the US liberals that I know of. I can understand why the Germans might have a problem with Naziism.

[Darth Executor]

Now you're just creating a straw man.

Nobody said the article stated "liberals are the problem", or anything like that. I made the observation that your priorities are screwed-up if after violent protest by Nazi's, you are going to beat the same old dead horse that liberals are silencing free speech.

The protest was only violent because leftists showed up to attack them. It's perfectly fair and appropriate to blame liberals for silencing free speech because that's exactly what they were doing. To make matters worse it wasn't just leftist rioters either, the governor ordered the cops to make the situation worse by refusing to split the two sides apart and forcing the right wingers to disperse so they can be assaulted more easily by antifas. No amount of denial is gonna change the facts, which are well known to anybody who's been following the story on social media.

[Cow Poke]

Now you're just creating a straw man.

Nobody said the article stated "liberals are the problem", or anything like that. I made the observation that your priorities are screwed-up if after violent protest by Nazi's, you are going to beat the same old dead horse that liberals are silencing free speech.

Sea, get a hold of yourself. That post wasn't to you - it was to Star, who said "2. The next day CP posts a thread saying liberals are the real problem not Nazis."

I actually QUOTED him -- perhaps you missed that....

1. Nazis hold violent rally that leads to a death
2. The next day CP posts a thread saying liberals are the real problem not Nazis..

Stop kissing his butt long enough to let him answer. And if you want to stay on this DERAIL about my intentions, you can leave, too.

[Jedidiah]

I like how after a group of radical MAGA's hold a violent demonstration, the liberals are still the problem right now in your head.

When do you ever call out on your own side?

Who attacked a peaceful protest?

[Jedidiah]

The protest was only violent because leftists showed up to attack them. It's perfectly fair and appropriate to blame liberals for silencing free speech because that's exactly what they were doing. To make matters worse it wasn't just leftist rioters either, the governor ordered the cops to make the situation worse by refusing to split the two sides apart and forcing the right wingers to disperse so they can be assaulted more easily by antifas. No amount of denial is gonna change the facts, which are well known to anybody who's been following the story on social media.

Do you get this yet Red?

[Jedidiah]

1. Nazis hold violent rally that leads to a death
2. The next day CP posts a thread saying liberals are the real problem not Nazis.

Since in fact CP made no such implication I will ask a question. How many liberals are there in the US? A whole lot. How many real Nazis are there in the US? A hand full. So indeed it is the liberals (who attacked a peaceful protest and made it into a riot) who are the problem.

[NorrinRadd]

Unpopular opinion but I don't think many people actually truly support the First Amendment as written. By allowing exceptions like fire in a crowded theater, slander, threats, etc., that's already admitting that freedom of speech is not absolute, but the way the First Amendment is written doesn't leave room for any exceptions at all.

I agree.

For practical reasons, though, I'm fine with the way it's generally interpreted.

I do not agree. I want freedom of speech to be absolute. Yes, I realize this is highly impractical, only because about 65% of the populace is too emotionally immature and fragile to handle it. But it should still be the goal.

[Cow Poke]

I do not agree. I want freedom of speech to be absolute. Yes, I realize this is highly impractical, only because about 65% of the populace is too emotionally immature and fragile to handle it. But it should still be the goal.

No exceptions? Inciting to riot would be a "right"?

[NorrinRadd]

No exceptions? Inciting to riot would be a "right"?

I'm inclined to say "Yes." There is no necessity for anyone to be such an idiot as to follow the incitement.