JimBowie1958
Old Fogey
- Sep 25, 2011
- 63,590
- 16,767
- 2,220
The advocacy oif murder is not protected by the First Amendment, dimwit, no matter how you spin it.Restricting free speech is never a good idea.
Dont be ridiculous, no one has the right to advocate acts like murder. No one has the right to use speech that would result in the deaths of innocent people or violates agreed to regulations passed into law. Broadcasting on illegal radio wave lengths is not protected by the Frist Amendment nor shouting fire in a crowded theater etc.
There are plenty of times that speech is wisely and Constitutionally restricted, dude.
Obviously you took me way out of context. "Advocating murder" isn't clear enough. If I advocate murder should be generally legal, sure, it's protected speech. If I'm threatening the murder of a person then the threat is illegal, not the speech. Your argument is like my saying driving a car should be legal. You come back with oh yeah, what if you're driving away from a robbery! That's aiding and abetting, a crime! Yes, aiding and abetting is illegal, not driving cars. Y
ou can say the exact same threat words in a different context (say it in your room) or you can write it or someone can repeat it. You could just make a throat slashing gesture. The question is still is it a threat, not is is free speech
Bull, it's not against the law to advocate changing the law. Stop being thick
That is not what I said, moron.
And what about all the other special interests, that's OK? Unions where their money is forced by government from all the workers? Why is that right? Why can't my for profit donate but special interest non-profits do it.
The only solution to government is limiting it's size, that is the only way to not play an endless game of whack a mole
No, there are other 'solutions' as well; why do peopp[le take this 'There can be only One Solution' Highlander perspective on every problem?
And NONPROFIT corporations/groups would be OK, yes, that is why I specified that only for-profit corporations donations and ads should be banned, and fuck the Supreme Courts bullshit, change it by Amendment from an Article V convention.
All you did was repeat your position. Why should a generator of economic activity have it's speech restricted while a left wing nut "non profit" who want to destroy corporations be unlimited? Why should unions who use government mandated and enforced dues be able to use all their members money including those who oppose them?
And again, it's flagrantly Unconstitutional, how you going to deal with that? You haven't proposed any solution, all you did it restrict one arbitrary group who influence government
The SCOTUS decision giving corporations the same rights as people and declaring to be legally people is degenerate, absurd and unjust.
If we have to pas a Constitutional amendment to do it we must do it to prevent for-profit corporations from buying the whole political system as they have done now for some time.
This would be apparent to anyone other than an ideological idiot Libertarian.
Explain how if I pool my money in an economic endeavor, I lose my Constitutional rights. Show where that is in the Constitution.
And again, wow, corporations are only one area corrupting our political process and yet they're the only one you're dealing with. Seriously, you don't see the leftist groups as just as big a threat?
Also, I'm a libertarian, not a Libertarian. And I'm advocating the ONLY solution that would work. You can't change that government is corrupted, you can reduce it's ability to do damage by minimizing it's size
Again, that is not what I said.
Take a remedial reading class.