Jonathan Fucking Turley was on Fox complaining that patriots were "attacking" judges who just picked up a Trump case or something. Judges aren't fucking gods. Rape them.
Jonathan Fucking Turley was on Fox complaining that patriots were "attacking" judges who just picked up a Trump case or something. Judges aren't fucking gods. Rape them.
Jonathan Fucking Turley was on Fox complaining that patriots were "attacking" judges who just picked up a Trump case or something. Judges aren't fucking gods. Rape them.
Judges are not immune to criticism based on their past actions whereas Turley claims you have to wait for them to screw up in I guess basically your case before you complain.
I think the decision leans heavily on the idea of “protected class” under taxajewsetts law and this is why the judge can get away with this.
And so I makes me wonder: Isn’t there something about “all men are created equal” in our base laws somewhere? And wouldn’t such a phrase invalidate the idea of any “protected classes”?
The only time speech isn't legally protected is if it fails the Brandenburg Test. That means the speech must be inciting unlawful action that is both likely AND imminent. It must be calling for a specific action at a specific time.
Stating a biological FACT is 100% protected speech, and this should not even be up for debate.
The question is, will the kike judges up the line uphold this ruling on appeal? This is going to be a huge litmus test for whether the First Amendment is officially dead.
And I'm sure Tallest_Skil will agree, if nobody does anything about it, then we deserve whatever comes next.
Stating a biological FACT is 100% protected speech, and this should not even be up for debate.
Good point. Can anyone prove the existence of these other so-called genders? And I mean affirmative proof, supported by physical evidence and not simply someone's word (even if they're considered some sort of authority); the same level of burden of proof that would be expected in an actual, legitimate court of law, not this kangaroo court.
That's the problem with clown world. All courts are kangaroo and all scientific endevours have similarly been subverted. They will make the evidence if they want to.
Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) was one of the first to begin narrowing the "fighting words" doctrine. Under a per curiam decision, even things like "Bury the niggers" and "Send the jews back to Israel" were held to be protected speech.
In 1972, it was ruled that offensive and insulting language, even when directed at specific people, was not "fighting words."
Collin v. Smith (1978) ruled that Nazis displaying swastikas and wearing military-style uniforms and marching through a jewish community, were not using "fighting words."
Texas v. Johnson (1989) redefined the scope to "a direct personal insult or an invitation to exchange fisticuffs."
R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992) and Virginia v. Black (2003) held that cross burning is not "fighting words" without intent to intimidate.
In Snyder v. Phelps (2011), even (((Ginsburg))) argued that the court had rejected spreading the concept of "fighting words" beyond ones that immediately trigger an instinctive action.
So there is a shit-ton of case law to show that a t-shirt saying "There Are Only Two Genders" is 100% protected speech.
Fuck your freedom. The truth will be what sets you free, and you will follow it and ensure it is the only thing that exists in the minds of the masses.
No different than if one student wears a “black lives matter” shirt and another wears a “white lives matter” shirt. One is celebrated, one is a hate crime….
We are not a nation of the rule of law- and never will be. We are a nation of political will. Those with the greater political will make and enforce the rules of law at their discretion.
[ + ] con77
[ - ] con77 9 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 11:41:10 ago (+9/-0)
[ + ] bonghits4jeebus
[ - ] bonghits4jeebus 2 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 17:26:14 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] bonghits4jeebus
[ - ] bonghits4jeebus 2 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 17:26:16 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] bonghits4jeebus
[ - ] bonghits4jeebus 2 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 17:26:19 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 1 point 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 21:47:42 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] blit416
[ - ] blit416 0 points 10 monthsJun 18, 2023 03:15:02 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] bonghits4jeebus
[ - ] bonghits4jeebus 0 points 10 monthsJun 18, 2023 17:01:46 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 12:49:33 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] TheNoticing
[ - ] TheNoticing 0 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 19:40:34 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 0 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 21:48:14 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 21:48:28 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 0 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 21:47:12 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] SocksOnCats
[ - ] SocksOnCats 6 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 12:10:40 ago (+6/-0)
And so I makes me wonder: Isn’t there something about “all men are created equal” in our base laws somewhere? And wouldn’t such a phrase invalidate the idea of any “protected classes”?
[ + ] uvulectomy
[ - ] uvulectomy 5 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 11:48:37 ago (+5/-0)*
The only time speech isn't legally protected is if it fails the Brandenburg Test. That means the speech must be inciting unlawful action that is both likely AND imminent. It must be calling for a specific action at a specific time.
Stating a biological FACT is 100% protected speech, and this should not even be up for debate.
The question is, will the kike judges up the line uphold this ruling on appeal? This is going to be a huge litmus test for whether the First Amendment is officially dead.
And I'm sure Tallest_Skil will agree, if nobody does anything about it, then we deserve whatever comes next.
[ + ] La_Chalupacabra
[ - ] La_Chalupacabra 1 point 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 12:56:22 ago (+1/-0)
Good point.
Can anyone prove the existence of these other so-called genders?
And I mean affirmative proof, supported by physical evidence and not simply someone's word (even if they're considered some sort of authority); the same level of burden of proof that would be expected in an actual, legitimate court of law, not this kangaroo court.
[ + ] PotatoWhisperer2
[ - ] PotatoWhisperer2 3 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 16:27:56 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 1 point 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 21:50:56 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Sleazy
[ - ] Sleazy 1 point 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 16:11:59 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] TheNoticing
[ - ] TheNoticing 0 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 19:42:04 ago (+0/-0)
Is that like that "fighting words" bullshit?
[ + ] uvulectomy
[ - ] uvulectomy 0 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 19:55:02 ago (+0/-0)
In 1972, it was ruled that offensive and insulting language, even when directed at specific people, was not "fighting words."
Collin v. Smith (1978) ruled that Nazis displaying swastikas and wearing military-style uniforms and marching through a jewish community, were not using "fighting words."
Texas v. Johnson (1989) redefined the scope to "a direct personal insult or an invitation to exchange fisticuffs."
R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992) and Virginia v. Black (2003) held that cross burning is not "fighting words" without intent to intimidate.
In Snyder v. Phelps (2011), even (((Ginsburg))) argued that the court had rejected spreading the concept of "fighting words" beyond ones that immediately trigger an instinctive action.
So there is a shit-ton of case law to show that a t-shirt saying "There Are Only Two Genders" is 100% protected speech.
[ + ] con77
[ - ] con77 4 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 11:26:58 ago (+4/-0)
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 0 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 21:53:23 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Tallest_Skil
[ - ] Tallest_Skil 3 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 11:20:04 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] PhantomXLII
[ - ] PhantomXLII 3 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 10:30:15 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang -1 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 21:54:29 ago (+0/-1)
See free.
[ + ] PhantomXLII
[ - ] PhantomXLII 0 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 22:54:03 ago (+0/-0)
Fuck your freedom. The truth will be what sets you free, and you will follow it and ensure it is the only thing that exists in the minds of the masses.
[ + ] bonghits4jeebus
[ - ] bonghits4jeebus 2 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 17:25:31 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 0 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 21:55:17 ago (+0/-0)
Coming soon!
[ + ] Steelerfish
[ - ] Steelerfish 2 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 17:13:47 ago (+2/-0)
One is celebrated, one is a hate crime….
We are not a nation of the rule of law- and never will be. We are a nation of political will. Those with the greater political will make and enforce the rules of law at their discretion.
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 0 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 21:55:58 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Steelerfish
[ - ] Steelerfish 0 points 10 monthsJun 18, 2023 07:43:12 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] TheGreatWar
[ - ] TheGreatWar 2 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 16:36:23 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] BoraxTheFungarian
[ - ] BoraxTheFungarian 2 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 16:03:34 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 0 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 21:57:28 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Cantaloupe
[ - ] Cantaloupe 2 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 16:00:21 ago (+2/-0)
It sounds like arguing about the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.
Infact that might be a good protest shit
There are only two angels that can dance on a pinhead.
(With the double entendre of how stupid the discussion is)
Somebody tweet it to the Jewish judge
[ + ]deleted
[ - ] deleted 2 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 15:44:46 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 2 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 13:29:18 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] psykx
[ - ] psykx 2 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 10:06:57 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 0 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 21:59:00 ago (+0/-0)
Easy test to break their delusion. Punch em in the adams apple.
Ya know why it's called an adams apple?
Because eve didn't have one ya fuckin faggot.
[ + ] Sleazy
[ - ] Sleazy 1 point 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 16:10:17 ago (+1/-0)
The right of freedom of speech is being infringed
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 1 point 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 22:01:17 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] VitaminSieg
[ - ] VitaminSieg 1 point 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 15:09:39 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ]deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 10 monthsJun 18, 2023 11:49:36 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] SirNiggsalot
[ - ] SirNiggsalot 0 points 10 monthsJun 18, 2023 05:36:56 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] GayPatriot1969
[ - ] GayPatriot1969 -1 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 15:40:20 ago (+1/-2)
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 0 points 10 monthsJun 17, 2023 22:02:15 ago (+0/-0)