Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2024 17:37:39 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Inconvenient lefties Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv References: <17c37b6c29057425$4757$3037545$10d55a65@news.newsdemon.com> <25Ccnb-dnerIwo37nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@giganews.com> <17c3845f233a098e$3282$2820980$c4d58e68@news.newsdemon.com> <0B2dnfnk4IawGI37nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com> <17c3b829d977a4bb$361$1351842$40d50a60@news.newsdemon.com> <17c3e0882b0394ca$5560$3037545$10d55a65@news.newsdemon.com> Content-Language: en-US From: moviePig In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 54 Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail Nntp-Posting-Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2024 21:37:41 +0000 X-Received-Bytes: 3454 Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com Message-Id: <17c46bc72d8ba76b$33827$3384359$c2d58868@news.newsdemon.com> Bytes: 3835 On 4/8/2024 4:28 PM, BTR1701 wrote: > In article , FPP > wrote: > >> On 4/6/24 11:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>> In article <17c3e0882b0394ca$5560$3037545$10d55a65@news.newsdemon.com>, >>> moviePig wrote: >>> >>>> On 4/6/2024 2:41 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>> In article <17c3b829d977a4bb$361$1351842$40d50a60@news.newsdemon.com>, >>>>> moviePig wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 4/5/2024 7:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>> On Apr 5, 2024 at 3:57:07 PM PDT, "moviePig" wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 4/5/2024 4:30 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>> moviePig wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> What *opinion* -- of anything anywhere -- can't be contradicted? >>>>>>>>>> Fyi, *that* would be a violation of 'free speech'... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> No one's muzzling or prohibiting you from making contradictory >>>>>>>>> statements regarding the SCOTUS ruling. However, your right to free >>>>>>>>> speech doesn't immunize you from being wrong or bar others from >>>>>>>>> pointing out your wrongness. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ...where "wrongness" means "of differing opinion". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You can have an opinion that SCOTUS decided wrongly and wish it had >>>>>>> made a different ruling but you can't have an opinion that the law is >>>>>>> other than it is. >>>>>> >>>>>> The 'law' is what SCOTUS has opinions about. I can have *my* opinion >>>>>> about either or both. Therein, the only "wrong" would be a misquoting. >>>>> >>>>> No, the law is what it is and it's not what you claim. You can have your >>>>> own opinions but you can't have your own facts. >>>> >>>> No? The law *isn't* text that SCOTUS has opinions about? ...as I may? >>> >>> No, SCOTUS opinions become the law. > >> Corrupt and illegitimate courts make corrupt and illegitimate laws. > > The court that decided the Skokie case (which is what we're talking > about here) was full of leftists. Weird that you'd be calling them > corrupt and/or that their decisions are illegitimate. > > I guess that's all you have left in your zeal to pretend we have laws > against 'hate speech' in America. Nobody has pretended we have such laws. In fact, the genesis of this snipe hunt was my riposte to FPP's claim that there *are* no such laws.