8 - 0 SCOTUS Ruling - There Is No Hate Speech Exemption

[Ivytalk]

Yep on Feinstein. Progressives tend to not support the security state and loss of privacy rights.

When's that dreamboat, Gavin Newsome gonna seek higher office?

But they do largely support the idea that what they consider to be "hate speech" should not be protected by the 1st Amendment

Which is why we got on the subject of Feinstein in the first place

Progressives will defend to the death your right to agree with them.

[kalm]

Yep on Feinstein. Progressives tend to not support the security state and loss of privacy rights.

When's that dreamboat, Gavin Newsome gonna seek higher office?

But they do largely support the idea that what they consider to be "hate speech" should not be protected by the 1st Amendment

Which is why we got on the subject of Feinstein in the first place

Idiotic campus liberals and Feinstein hardly represent "largely".

Although the concerning part is those campus activists might go on to become tomorrow's "progressives".

[CID1990]

But they do largely support the idea that what they consider to be "hate speech" should not be protected by the 1st Amendment

Which is why we got on the subject of Feinstein in the first place

Idiotic campus liberals and Feinstein hardly represent "largely".

Although the concerning part is those campus activists might go on to become tomorrow's "progressives".

Well I hate to pull a Jelly on you, but here's some graphs and some semantics:

https://today.yougov.com/news/2014/10/0 ... eech-laws/

Dems overall are at 51% (that's technically largely)

We can safely assume that if you take out the moderate Dems, the number is higher (also largely)

[kalm]

Idiotic campus liberals and Feinstein hardly represent "largely".

Although the concerning part is those campus activists might go on to become tomorrow's "progressives".

Well I hate to pull a Jelly on you, but here's some graphs and some semantics:

https://today.yougov.com/news/2014/10/0 ... eech-laws/

Dems overall are at 51% (that's technically largely)

We can safely assume that if you take out the moderate Dems, the number is higher (also largely)

Dems aren't necessarily "progressive".

[CID1990]

Well I hate to pull a Jelly on you, but here's some graphs and some semantics:

https://today.yougov.com/news/2014/10/0 ... eech-laws/

Dems overall are at 51% (that's technically largely)

We can safely assume that if you take out the moderate Dems, the number is higher (also largely)

Dems aren't necessarily "progressive".

Exactly

That's why the 51% is likely higher if you just ask "progressives"

[kalm]

Dems aren't necessarily "progressive".

Exactly

That's why the 51% is likely higher if you just ask "progressives"

Gotcha. That's the problem with labels and self identification.

[CID1990]

Exactly

That's why the 51% is likely higher if you just ask "progressives"

Gotcha. That's the problem with labels and self identification.

The fact that a FULL 50% of ANY major group would support pulling constitutional protections from offensive speech is a problem

If they were sitting down around 30% then we could just say that 30% of democrats polled are nuts.

[Chizzang]

Gotcha. That's the problem with labels and self identification.

The fact that a FULL 50% of ANY major group would support pulling constitutional protections from offensive speech is a problem

If they were sitting down around 30% then we could just say that 30% of democrats polled are nuts.

I don't think they're nuts CID ^
I think they're intellectually LAZY and or (more likely and) stupid



If you asked med (and you didn't) that's our biggest problem in this new Political Environment
is lazy group think vs. real intellectual discovery

[kalm]

The fact that a FULL 50% of ANY major group would support pulling constitutional protections from offensive speech is a problem

If they were sitting down around 30% then we could just say that 30% of democrats polled are nuts.

I don't think they're nuts CID ^
I think they're intellectually LAZY and or (more likely and) stupid



If you asked med (and you didn't) that's our biggest problem in this new Political Environment
is lazy group think vs. real intellectual discovery

One of many reasons I've never liked groups...

[CAA Flagship]

I don't think they're nuts CID ^
I think they're intellectually LAZY and or (more likely and) stupid



If you asked med (and you didn't) that's our biggest problem in this new Political Environment
is lazy group think vs. real intellectual discovery

One of many reasons I've never liked groups...

Too many nuts?

[UNI88]

Harris is a fighter for Progressives...no one else...

That is far from "the rest of us"...

Progressives look out for all.

Republicans wake up every day worried that someone, somewhere, is getting something they don't deserve.

Democrats wake up everyday worried that someone, somewhere, isn't getting something they need.

Why is it assumed that Progressives are Democrats? IMO, a true Progressive would not advocate for curtailing free speech.

[GannonFan]

Progressives look out for all.

Republicans wake up every day worried that someone, somewhere, is getting something they don't deserve.

Democrats wake up everyday worried that someone, somewhere, isn't getting something they need.

Why is it assumed that Progressives are Democrats? IMO, a true Progressive would not advocate for curtailing free speech.

Well, there are certainly a lot more Progressives in the Democratic party than in the Republican party and we're in a two party system. And why would a true Progressive not advocate for curtailing free speech? A lot of the triggering and safe space and privilege-checking comes from Progressives in the first place.

[Skjellyfetti]

Only if you don't consider the religious conservatives to be conservative.

The left has SJWs and the right has Family Research Council types.

Your free speech rights can be incredibly harmful to someone else.

If each side could get rid of these idiots... our politics would be much better.

[Col Hogan]

Being harmful, and being banned are completely different things

[Skjellyfetti]

So, the religious types don't try to ban shit they don't like?

Movements to ban things like Harry Potter and and certain children's books from public libraries?



Parents Television Council and Sons of Anarchy.

Falwell's war against Tinky-Winky.

[Ibanez]

Harris is a fighter for Progressives...no one else...

That is far from "the rest of us"...

Progressives look out for all.

Republicans wake up every day worried that someone, somewhere, is getting something they don't deserve.

Democrats wake up everyday worried that someone, somewhere, isn't getting something they need.

With a mindset like this...ah fuck it nevermind.

[GannonFan]

So, the religious types don't try to ban **** they don't like?

Movements to ban things like Harry Potter and and certain children's books from public libraries?



Parents Television Council and Sons of Anarchy.

Falwell's war against Tinky-Winky.

You're right that both sides have their opportunists when it comes to relegating free speech, but the ones on the right want to ban books from public libraries and schools. The ones on the left want fines or jail times for words that hurt. College campuses lionize civil unrest that results in violence that shuts down those they disagree with. The left is beating the right currently in terms of pervasiveness of their distaste of the other side's viewpoints.

[AZGrizFan]

Too bad Donks don't agree. They believe they should be able to shut down ANY speech they don't agree with.

LOL. Get back to reality. You see more censorship and snowflakery coming from the GOP and the Trumpanzees than you do liberals.



Back to the topic - good ruling. Speech isn't always nice or clean, and maintaining the First Amendments means some will get uncomfortable.

Yeah. You see conks rioting ALL the time to shut down free speech on college campuses. All the time.

[AZGrizFan]

Harris is a fighter for Progressives...no one else...

That is far from "the rest of us"...

Progressives look out for all.

Republicans wake up every day worried that someone, somewhere, is getting something they don't deserve.

Democrats wake up everyday worried that someone, somewhere, isn't getting something they need.

Need.

Need.

That word does not mean what you think it means.

Democrats wake up every day worried that someone, somewhere who's working their ass off might get ahead of them and they spend their day being jealous of other peoples' success and feel it's their birthright to have what that person has WITHOUT putting in the work.

[Ibanez]

LOL. Get back to reality. You see more censorship and snowflakery coming from the GOP and the Trumpanzees than you do liberals.



Back to the topic - good ruling. Speech isn't always nice or clean, and maintaining the First Amendments means some will get uncomfortable.

Yeah. You see conks rioting ALL the time to shut down free speech on college campuses. All the time.

What about all the conks that are damaging private property, torching police vehicles, beating up Bernie Sanders voters....oh wait...

[Bisonfanatical]

So, the religious types don't try to ban **** they don't like?

Movements to ban things like Harry Potter and and certain children's books from public libraries?



Parents Television Council and Sons of Anarchy.

Falwell's war against Tinky-Winky.

True,
SOME of those religious (and other) types try to ban unwanted and possibly harmful ideas being exposed to their children's minds, is that wrong?

SOME of those liberals (and other) types try to ban unwanted and possibly harmful ideas from being exposed to their children's minds, is that wrong?

Is what is good for the goose also good for the gander?



Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Ivytalk]

So, the religious types don't try to ban **** they don't like?

Movements to ban things like Harry Potter and and certain children's books from public libraries?



Parents Television Council and Sons of Anarchy.

Falwell's war against Tinky-Winky.

You're right that both sides have their opportunists when it comes to relegating free speech, but the ones on the right want to ban books from public libraries and schools. The ones on the left want fines or jail times for words that hurt. College campuses lionize civil unrest that results in violence that shuts down those they disagree with. The left is beating the right currently in terms of pervasiveness of their distaste of the other side's viewpoints.

I think this is correct. The lion's share of the violence is coming from the Left. Certainly since Election Day, no reasonable person can argue otherwise.

[Ibanez]

You're right that both sides have their opportunists when it comes to relegating free speech, but the ones on the right want to ban books from public libraries and schools. The ones on the left want fines or jail times for words that hurt. College campuses lionize civil unrest that results in violence that shuts down those they disagree with. The left is beating the right currently in terms of pervasiveness of their distaste of the other side's viewpoints.

I think this is correct. The lion's share of the violence is coming from the Left. Certainly since Election Day, no reasonable person can argue otherwise.

Dback will tell you otherwise


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

Progressives look out for all.

Republicans wake up every day worried that someone, somewhere, is getting something they don't deserve.

Democrats wake up everyday worried that someone, somewhere, isn't getting something they need.

Why is it assumed that Progressives are Democrats? IMO, a true Progressive would not advocate for curtailing free speech.

This guy gets it.

[Ivytalk]

I think this is correct. The lion's share of the violence is coming from the Left. Certainly since Election Day, no reasonable person can argue otherwise.

Dback will tell you otherwise


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Proves my point.