News
news US firm develops drone with gun and grenades
news How wearable tech is giving people a sixth sense
news You Won't Feel It When the Eclipse Burns Your Eyeballs
news Mobile Moss Structures Can Filter Our Dirty City Air
news Afraid of the Dark? Why Eclipses Frightened Ancient Civilizations
news The Inside Story of Disney’s Mythic UFO Documentary and Conference
news Antarctica is home to considerably more volcanoes than previously thought
news Who Is Doing This? Global Wave of Animal Mutilations Defies Explanation
news New device can heal with a single touch, and even repair brain injuries
news East Field Farmer's Wife Remembers Wiltshire Crop Circles in the 1940s and 50s
news The ghostly radio station that no one claims to run



Username:
Password: or Register
 
Thread Rating:
  • 13 Vote(s) - 4.69 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
Karu
Registered User
User ID: 356775
06-19-2017 10:49 PM

Posts: 18,142



Post: #46
RE: Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
Advertisement
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:21 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:07 PM)
Rhetoric will change dramatically across the country.
I like this!

No it won't. Corporations/advertisers will still pull advertising and squash their revenue if they're not in line.

The editor in chief at breitbart is sobbing croc tears over that fact Tissue

Speaking of corporations...what about corporations rights to sue those people who review their products unfavorably?

If society fell apart, we - the people would build a new one. Most people are good at their core, and when we see things that are wrong we work to fix them together. Make friends with your neighbors, get involved with your community - because we will rebuild our lives, our communities, from horrible circumstances we always will.
Quote this message in a reply

jcab2000
Registered User
User ID: 402822
06-19-2017 10:50 PM

Posts: 7,797



Post: #47
RE: Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
Hé_Zeus  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:44 PM)
HOPEFULLY -- Since "hate speech" has fallen logically speaking the next of these unjust "hate laws" to fall by way of SCOTUS will be the false notion of a "hate crime." Then so-called "thought crimes" will be next to go -- all of which have Zionist roots one being generated by the other.
Hate crimes are an extension of hate speech, so I expect hate crime to wind up in the Supreme Court eventually.

The entire cancer industry exists to protect the corporations that are manufacturing products that cause cancer.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 397519
06-19-2017 11:06 PM

 



Post: #48
RE: Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 09:39 PM)
Perhaps it is time for all in the USA to study their own unique State Constitutions.

How long has it been that many have done just that?

I wish they would, constitutions are good reads.

Jhikpghf
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 397519
06-19-2017 11:07 PM

 



Post: #49
RE: Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:08 PM)
SlowLoris  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:05 PM)
So what happens to people currently serving time for "hate speech"?

.

I assume they will shortly be, if they aren't already, processed out and will soon be free, provided hate speech was the only "crime" they committed.

Yah but what about their lives that have been ruined? The boot of the state leaves deep footprints.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 397519
06-19-2017 11:09 PM

 



Post: #50
RE: Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:17 PM)
Haters can continue to hate!

You think laws prevent people from hating? That's delusional.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 397042
06-19-2017 11:09 PM

 



Post: #51
RE: Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:06 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 09:47 PM)
It's scary to see the split in this court.

Alito

The idea that the government may restrict] speech expressing ideas that offend … strikes at the heart of the First Amendment.

- it is clear and straight forward. the 1st A is 'your right'

Kennedy

A law that can be directed against speech found offensive to some portion of the public can be turned against minority and dissenting views to the detriment of all. The First Amendment does not entrust that power to the government’s benevolence.

- I would shut your ass up, whiteboy, but then this decision might be used against minorities somehow.
THere are hundreds of types of minorities in the USA, your's is only one of them. So sad that only the black seem to think they are the only minority.

Every human beings' family on Earth is in fact a Minority.

Get over yourselves.

This is really nice and sweet, snowflake, but you have to understand the way the the propaganda masters speak in code to the brainless dupes.
Quote this message in a reply
SlowLoris
Don't mess with Granny
User ID: 375807
06-19-2017 11:12 PM

Posts: 13,524



Post: #52
RE: Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
jcab2000  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:50 PM)
Hé_Zeus  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:44 PM)
HOPEFULLY -- Since "hate speech" has fallen logically speaking the next of these unjust "hate laws" to fall by way of SCOTUS will be the false notion of a "hate crime." Then so-called "thought crimes" will be next to go -- all of which have Zionist roots one being generated by the other.
Hate crimes are an extension of hate speech, so I expect hate crime to wind up in the Supreme Court eventually.

Hate is hate.

A woman can hate her husband enough to murder him in his sleep. Is it a hate crime? No it's simply a crime. People hate for a myriad of reasons. Short, tall, fat, skinny, mentally slow, gender confused, etc.

Why is hatred of a particular ethnicity or sex or nationality more of a crime than hatred of ones mother-in-law?

When the hatred boils over into committing a murder, the victim is still dead. They aren't more dead just because they are a different color than the murderer.

.

Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 397042
06-19-2017 11:13 PM

 



Post: #53
RE: Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:14 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:06 PM)
THere are hundreds of types of minorities in the USA, your's is only one of them. So sad that only the black seem to think they are the only minority.

Every human beings' family on Earth is in fact a Minority.

Get over yourselves.

That isn't even about minorities, it's minority opinion not being powerful enough to override the MAJORITY opinion!

In fact. what Kennedy said backs up the democratic process of MAJORITY RULE. So this SCOTUS ruling is strengthening two concepts of free speech in America, and clarifying how our government works!

No, it's about minorities. It's the left dog-whistle. He could have easily said (like Alito). We believe that all people are equal and they have unalienable rights, period. He did not say this. He said: well if I shut this Hate speech down, in the future it will be used against MINORITIES. That was his problem. He's making it clear he favors hate speech laws as long as they geared to protect minorities from the repercussions of having hate speech laws applied to them.
Quote this message in a reply
Tesla_ReCoiled
Nicola Tesla Created The Modern World
User ID: 417346
06-19-2017 11:17 PM

Posts: 4,632



Post: #54
RE: Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
jcab2000  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:44 PM)
Karu  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:10 PM)
Good question and what about the 10 students that were kicked out of Harvard for posting their opinions?

http://wwlp.com/2017/06/19/free-speech-o...-postings/

Harvard doesn't guarantee 1st amendment rights since they're private. It should work at public universities though.

As Volokh points out, in this case, the government didn’t bar The Slants from using the mark; it just denied certain protections that trademarks get against unauthorized use by third parties. But even in this limited context, the court held that viewpoint discrimination — including against allegedly racially offensive viewpoints — is unconstitutional.

Clearly, says Volokh, the same principle will apply to exclusion of speakers from universities, [including Harvard] denial of tax exemptions to nonprofits, and much more. http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/20...ndment.php
(This post was last modified: 06-19-2017 11:19 PM by Tesla_ReCoiled.) Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 408339
06-19-2017 11:20 PM

 



Post: #55
RE: Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 11:13 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:14 PM)
That isn't even about minorities, it's minority opinion not being powerful enough to override the MAJORITY opinion!

In fact. what Kennedy said backs up the democratic process of MAJORITY RULE. So this SCOTUS ruling is strengthening two concepts of free speech in America, and clarifying how our government works!

No, it's about minorities. It's the left dog-whistle. He could have easily said (like Alito). We believe that all people are equal and they have unalienable rights, period. He did not say this. He said: well if I shut this Hate speech down, in the future it will be used against MINORITIES. That was his problem. He's making it clear he favors hate speech laws as long as they geared to protect minorities from the repercussions of having hate speech laws applied to them.

Dude, you have a reading comprehension problem.

The SCOTUS ruling on there being no such thing as hate speech, was unanimous. You're trying to act like Kennedy was against it, when he was not, and all because you can't read a sentence correctly.
Quote this message in a reply
jcab2000
Registered User
User ID: 402822
06-19-2017 11:23 PM

Posts: 7,797



Post: #56
RE: Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
Hé_Zeus  Wrote: (06-19-2017 11:17 PM)
jcab2000  Wrote: (06-19-2017 10:44 PM)
Harvard doesn't guarantee 1st amendment rights since they're private. It should work at public universities though.

As Volokh points out, in this case, the government didn’t bar The Slants from using the mark; it just denied certain protections that trademarks get against unauthorized use by third parties. But even in this limited context, the court held that viewpoint discrimination — including against allegedly racially offensive viewpoints — is unconstitutional.

Clearly, says Volokh, the same principle will apply to exclusion of speakers from universities, [including Harvard] denial of tax exemptions to nonprofits, and much more. http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/20...ndment.php

Government or its agencies cannot discriminate based on hate. The trademark office is a government agency. The first amendment does not apply to private entities. It applies only to government. Volokh must be referring to public universities, which are government run.

Government couldn't force the Washington Redskins to change its name, but the NFL could.

The entire cancer industry exists to protect the corporations that are manufacturing products that cause cancer.
(This post was last modified: 06-19-2017 11:25 PM by jcab2000.) Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 337163
06-19-2017 11:24 PM

 



Post: #57
RE: Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
Can someone please forward the memo to the censors here at LOP?
Quote this message in a reply
jcab2000
Registered User
User ID: 402822
06-19-2017 11:28 PM

Posts: 7,797



Post: #58
RE: Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-19-2017 11:24 PM)
Can someone please forward the memo to the censors here at LOP?

The first amendment doesn't apply to a message board except that the US government could not write laws about what is allowed on that message board. The owner can use whatever rules they want.

The entire cancer industry exists to protect the corporations that are manufacturing products that cause cancer.
Quote this message in a reply
Mr ifnoc
Location: All of it
User ID: 421897
06-19-2017 11:51 PM

Posts: 7,229



Post: #59
RE: Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
Karu  Wrote: (06-19-2017 08:27 PM)
[Image: 1497894866016.jpg]

SCOTUS is not having any of this "You're rights end where my feelings begin"...

snip:

From today’s opinion by Justice Samuel Alito (for four justices) in Matal v. Tam, the “Slants” case:

[The idea that the government may restrict] speech expressing ideas that offend … strikes at the heart of the First Amendment. Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express “the thought that we hate.”


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volo...amendment/

What would George Carlin say?????

& can I be the first to do so, in maximum size, and girth?
Popcorn

There's a Newdawnrising Heartflowers


Rest in peace Galaxy.:( Candle

Spiddy said, 3/22/15: I generally plug my cerebral cortex into a vagina but I guess you're close enough Fred.
:)

"Hilderbeast" ,(hillderbeast), or any variation of, are belonging to me! ®©™ per Fork!:)

Pray for Uli <3
Quote this message in a reply
BlackGhost
Flight of The Dragon
User ID: 411926
06-19-2017 11:51 PM

Posts: 9,108



Post: #60
RE: Supreme Court: There is no ‘hate speech"
finally some common sense coming out of the SCOTUS... I may not like what someone says or their beliefs, but at the end of the day this is my own problem, to resolve, and come to terms with.

The gov has no place in trying to suppress what I on a personal level disagree with, even if I could get a million signature to agree.

government that attempt to dictate ambiguous moral and ethical values thru laws beyond protecting against physical harm and property damage tend to drift toward theological beliefs.

besides it is much safer for a government to know who disagrees with them and the various conflicting interests in the country than to suppress such and blind itself from the truth being quietly expressed by its society. case and example... the outcome of the recent election, which I am quite certain weighed heavily on this decision.

☯ On occasion I sit on the edge of the universe, to watch new space expand as stardust shining in the light, with thin threads of blue flowing out like rivers giving birth to new life. ☯
(This post was last modified: 06-19-2017 11:53 PM by BlackGhost.) Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement









Contact UsConspiracy Forum. No reg. required! Return to TopReturn to ContentRSS Syndication