Watch and vote.
Yes. It is a basic human right.
No. Rabble rousers should be carted off to prison.
Watch and vote.
_____________________________________________
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
I believe in the first amendment...which says Congress shall not abridge freedom of speech...but that is not the same as someone being able to say anything they want anywhere at anytime
Last edited by GrenadaRoger; 02-26-2016 at 11:41 PM.
(long before there was a PFA i had my Grenade & Crossbones avatar at DD)
Perhaps you need to remember that constitutional law in the US is determined by the *court precedent* per case law, *not* simply by referring to the original text. Because the SCOTUS rulings on 1st Amendment rights extend to also limiting the ability of state and local government to ban speech.
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/...estions-speech
And that is also why *local* governments can't ban those annoying sign spinners on sidewalks even if it has ordinances restricting billboards and business signage. Because case precedent has determined it to be a protected form of speech.
_____________________________________________
mumbles, first you need to remember what you asked..."Do you support free speech?" i'd like you to please define what you mean by free speech...i gave you a hint by quoting the first amendment, which limits the ability of Congress to curtail free speechPerhaps you need to remember that constitutional law in the US is determined by the *court precedent* per case law, *not* simply by referring to the original text. Because the SCOTUS rulings on 1st Amendment rights extend to also limiting the ability of state and local government to ban speech.
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/...estions-speech
And that is also why *local* governments can't ban those annoying sign spinners on sidewalks even if it has ordinances restricting billboards and business signage. Because case precedent has determined it to be a protected form of speech.
i will engage you no more on this topic
(long before there was a PFA i had my Grenade & Crossbones avatar at DD)
Free speech is important. However I would like to propose another factor to take into consideration when putting this argument forward, and this would be the not wholly inappropriate or discourteous request for you to shut the fuck up.Perhaps you need to remember that constitutional law in the US is determined by the *court precedent* per case law, *not* simply by referring to the original text. Because the SCOTUS rulings on 1st Amendment rights extend to also limiting the ability of state and local government to ban speech.
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/...estions-speech
And that is also why *local* governments can't ban those annoying sign spinners on sidewalks even if it has ordinances restricting billboards and business signage. Because case precedent has determined it to be a protected form of speech.
#FREEJACK #NEVERFORGET
NoFraud Online Poker Room: http://nofraud.pokerfraudalert.com:8087. For password resets and reload requests PM me.
PREMIUM CONTENT
Are you for or against Premium Content?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote