Nobody hates the 1st amendment more than Trump
Comments
-
That's a stupid comment. Even though I completely disagree with burning the flag and wouldn't mind seeing their ass kicked by a soldier or vet while doing it, they have the right to do it.
-
Hardly the most egregious of abridgments nor original to Trump. But wrong nonetheless.
-
Trump shouldn't be allowed to say that
-
I didn't say he should be jailed for a year or lose his citizenship.RaceBannon said:Trump shouldn't be allowed to say that
You'd have to be swallowing all 2" of Trump thunder to defend that tweet. -
I said he shouldn't be allowed to say that.UWhuskytskeet said:
I didn't say he should be jailed for a year or lose his citizenship.RaceBannon said:Trump shouldn't be allowed to say that
You'd have to be swallowing all 2" of Trump thunder to defend that tweet.
No one should advocate for positions that go against what you think -
Why don't you just come out and say you want the 1st amendment murdered?RaceBannon said:
I said he shouldn't be allowed to say that.UWhuskytskeet said:
I didn't say he should be jailed for a year or lose his citizenship.RaceBannon said:Trump shouldn't be allowed to say that
You'd have to be swallowing all 2" of Trump thunder to defend that tweet.
No one should advocate for positions that go against what you think -
Could we see an executive order challenged judicially? I see nothing wrong with challenging the constitution. But this one seems pretty cut and dry.
-
The court ruled in a close decision to call flag burning protected speech. That means there is another side to that issue that one can reasonably advocate for.UWhuskytskeet said:
Why don't you just come out and say you want the 1st amendment murdered?RaceBannon said:
I said he shouldn't be allowed to say that.UWhuskytskeet said:
I didn't say he should be jailed for a year or lose his citizenship.RaceBannon said:Trump shouldn't be allowed to say that
You'd have to be swallowing all 2" of Trump thunder to defend that tweet.
No one should advocate for positions that go against what you think
I had to fight to wear a flag patch on my jeans in high school. Why don't you just get off your high horse and accept that not everyone thinks like you do -
Igniting pieces of fabric shouldn't result in a loss of citizenship or jail time. Period.RaceBannon said:
The court ruled in a close decision to call flag burning protected speech. That means there is another side to that issue that one can reasonably advocate for.UWhuskytskeet said:
Why don't you just come out and say you want the 1st amendment murdered?RaceBannon said:
I said he shouldn't be allowed to say that.UWhuskytskeet said:
I didn't say he should be jailed for a year or lose his citizenship.RaceBannon said:Trump shouldn't be allowed to say that
You'd have to be swallowing all 2" of Trump thunder to defend that tweet.
No one should advocate for positions that go against what you think
I had to fight to wear a flag patch on my jeans in high school. Why don't you just get off your high horse and accept that not everyone thinks like you do
Should be a fun four years. -
What does a close decision matter? Court ruled and upheld the constitution. I think flag burning is stupid. But that was your generation that made it cool. And it's free speech.RaceBannon said:
The court ruled in a close decision to call flag burning protected speech. That means there is another side to that issue that one can reasonably advocate for.UWhuskytskeet said:
Why don't you just come out and say you want the 1st amendment murdered?RaceBannon said:
I said he shouldn't be allowed to say that.UWhuskytskeet said:
I didn't say he should be jailed for a year or lose his citizenship.RaceBannon said:Trump shouldn't be allowed to say that
You'd have to be swallowing all 2" of Trump thunder to defend that tweet.
No one should advocate for positions that go against what you think
I had to fight to wear a flag patch on my jeans in high school. Why don't you just get off your high horse and accept that not everyone thinks like you do
It's amazing watching the supposed party if the Constitution accept this shit. Stand up to Trump and stop accepting the stupid shit he does just cause he's your guy. -
you've become a complete shill, congrats. he called for jail time when even Antonin scalia found that unconstitituionalRaceBannon said:
I said he shouldn't be allowed to say that.UWhuskytskeet said:
I didn't say he should be jailed for a year or lose his citizenship.RaceBannon said:Trump shouldn't be allowed to say that
You'd have to be swallowing all 2" of Trump thunder to defend that tweet.
No one should advocate for positions that go against what you think
-
I am all for free speech but there is speech likely to incite violence and that is outlawed in some states. Flag burning may well lead to an ass kicking which is the best kind of punishment for those engaged. Natural consequences is a great teacher, just like a hot stove.
-
I'm in favor of giving soldiers and vets a free pass to thunderfuck any flag burning douchebag they see, on the spot, no warning, just thunderfucked. Free speech with consequences and as an added bonus, free entertainment.greenblood said:That's a stupid comment. Even though I completely disagree with burning the flag and wouldn't mind seeing their ass kicked by a soldier or vet while doing it, they have the right to do it.
-
I believe in free speech, except when it's something I disagree withSledog said:I am all for free speech but there is speech likely to incite violence and that is outlawed in some states. Flag burning may well lead to an ass kicking which is the best kind of punishment for those engaged. Natural consequences is a great teacher, just like a hot stove.
-
It amazes me that on a bored full of trolls so many of you fucks can't recognize a troll at work.UWhuskytskeet said:
-
What would that leave to support tho?2001400ex said:
It's amazing watching the supposed party if the Constitution accept this shit. Stand up to Trump and stop accepting the stupid shit he does just cause he's your guy.RaceBannon said:
The court ruled in a close decision to call flag burning protected speech. That means there is another side to that issue that one can reasonably advocate for.UWhuskytskeet said:
Why don't you just come out and say you want the 1st amendment murdered?RaceBannon said:
I said he shouldn't be allowed to say that.UWhuskytskeet said:
I didn't say he should be jailed for a year or lose his citizenship.RaceBannon said:Trump shouldn't be allowed to say that
You'd have to be swallowing all 2" of Trump thunder to defend that tweet.
No one should advocate for positions that go against what you think
I had to fight to wear a flag patch on my jeans in high school. Why don't you just get off your high horse and accept that not everyone thinks like you do
-
What does the @DNC platform have to do with this?dhdawg said:
I believe in free speech, except when it's something I disagree withSledog said:I am all for free speech but there is speech likely to incite violence and that is outlawed in some states. Flag burning may well lead to an ass kicking which is the best kind of punishment for those engaged. Natural consequences is a great teacher, just like a hot stove.
-
The constitution and capitalism.AIRWOLF said:
What would that leave to support tho?2001400ex said:
It's amazing watching the supposed party if the Constitution accept this shit. Stand up to Trump and stop accepting the stupid shit he does just cause he's your guy.RaceBannon said:
The court ruled in a close decision to call flag burning protected speech. That means there is another side to that issue that one can reasonably advocate for.UWhuskytskeet said:
Why don't you just come out and say you want the 1st amendment murdered?RaceBannon said:
I said he shouldn't be allowed to say that.UWhuskytskeet said:
I didn't say he should be jailed for a year or lose his citizenship.RaceBannon said:Trump shouldn't be allowed to say that
You'd have to be swallowing all 2" of Trump thunder to defend that tweet.
No one should advocate for positions that go against what you think
I had to fight to wear a flag patch on my jeans in high school. Why don't you just get off your high horse and accept that not everyone thinks like you do -
Free speech isn't free of consequences. You offend people badly enough it leads to those consequences. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater or make bomb threats either.dhdawg said:
I believe in free speech, except when it's something I disagree withSledog said:I am all for free speech but there is speech likely to incite violence and that is outlawed in some states. Flag burning may well lead to an ass kicking which is the best kind of punishment for those engaged. Natural consequences is a great teacher, just like a hot stove.
If you think you can say whatever you want without consequence you're daft. -
Burning a flag is different than yelling fire or making bomb threats. It's specifically allowed and approved by conservative supreme court members.Sledog said:
Free speech isn't free of consequences. You offend people badly enough it leads to those consequences. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater or make bomb threats either.dhdawg said:
I believe in free speech, except when it's something I disagree withSledog said:I am all for free speech but there is speech likely to incite violence and that is outlawed in some states. Flag burning may well lead to an ass kicking which is the best kind of punishment for those engaged. Natural consequences is a great teacher, just like a hot stove.
If you think you can say whatever you want without consequence you're daft.
HTH -
Burning a flag while something I would never do isn't a direct threat of violence nor incites immediate fear like yelling fire in a theatre does. If someone wants to beat someone up for it, fine, but they should be prosecuted for it.
-
HondoFS Is just mad because the authoritarian he doesn't like said this rather than the authoritarian he loves.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_Protection_Act_of_2005 -
The law would have prohibited burning or otherwise destroying and damaging the US flag with the primary purpose of intimidation or inciting immediate violence or for the act of terrorism.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:HondoFS Is just mad because the authoritarian he doesn't like said this rather than the authoritarian he loves.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_Protection_Act_of_2005 -
WowWeAreAFatLesboSchool said:HondoFS Is just mad because the authoritarian he doesn't like said this rather than the authoritarian he loves.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_Protection_Act_of_2005
But still... -
or a breach of the peace; or (2) stealing or knowingly converting the use of a U.S. flag either belonging to the United States or on lands reserved for the United States and intentionally destroying or damaging that flag.[4]2001400ex said:
The law would have prohibited burning or otherwise destroying and damaging the US flag with the primary purpose of intimidation or inciting immediate violence or for the act of terrorism.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:HondoFS Is just mad because the authoritarian he doesn't like said this rather than the authoritarian he loves.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_Protection_Act_of_2005
even the NY Times thinks you're an idiot.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/07/opinion/senator-clinton-in-pander-mode.html?_r=0
-
yep. and Obama repealed habeus corpus in the shitty NDAA of 2012 that he signed. everyone sucksWeAreAFatLesboSchool said:HondoFS Is just mad because the authoritarian he doesn't like said this rather than the authoritarian he loves.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_Protection_Act_of_2005 -
dhdawg said:
Burning a fag while something I would never do isn't a direct threat of violence nor incites immediate fear like yelling fire in a theatre does. If someone wants to beat someone up for it, fine, but they should be prosecuted for it.
-
Yeah and Hillary couldn't even get the law on the floor with a conservative Congress. Do you have a point?WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:
or a breach of the peace; or (2) stealing or knowingly converting the use of a U.S. flag either belonging to the United States or on lands reserved for the United States and intentionally destroying or damaging that flag.[4]2001400ex said:
The law would have prohibited burning or otherwise destroying and damaging the US flag with the primary purpose of intimidation or inciting immediate violence or for the act of terrorism.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:HondoFS Is just mad because the authoritarian he doesn't like said this rather than the authoritarian he loves.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_Protection_Act_of_2005
even the NY Times thinks you're an idiot.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/07/opinion/senator-clinton-in-pander-mode.html?_r=0 -
Burning a flag is political speech, the SC made that determination decades ago. I don't trust the government to decide what kind of flag burning is intimidation and what isn't2001400ex said:
The law would have prohibited burning or otherwise destroying and damaging the US flag with the primary purpose of intimidation or inciting immediate violence or for the act of terrorism.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:HondoFS Is just mad because the authoritarian he doesn't like said this rather than the authoritarian he loves.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_Protection_Act_of_2005 -
Agreed. My point was,, the bill that was provided, that never left committee, had that as a clause.dhdawg said:
Burning a flag is political speech, the SC made that determination decades ago. I don't trust the government to decide what kind of flag burning is intimidation and what isn't2001400ex said:
The law would have prohibited burning or otherwise destroying and damaging the US flag with the primary purpose of intimidation or inciting immediate violence or for the act of terrorism.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:HondoFS Is just mad because the authoritarian he doesn't like said this rather than the authoritarian he loves.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_Protection_Act_of_2005
Burning the flag is FS. But it is free speech. I think our other laws already cover intimidation and terrorism.
