Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 15:49:40 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Inconvenient lefties Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv References: <17c0ceb693286352$341$3121036$c0d58a68@news.newsdemon.com> <2MucnTxnR-96cJn7nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com> <17c0fc54e55b8534$37200$3384359$c2d58868@news.newsdemon.com> <17c109af9b28102b$53484$2218499$46d50c60@news.newsdemon.com> <17c10e83f220909a$46168$3081049$52d51861@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: 87 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: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:49:43 +0000 X-Received-Bytes: 4576 X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com Message-Id: <17c1541544a78cce$43424$3716115$2d54864@news.newsdemon.com> Bytes: 4956 On 3/29/2024 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote: > On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:34:50 -0400, moviePig > wrote: > >> On 3/28/2024 6:06 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>> moviePig wrote: >>>> On 3/28/2024 2:31 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>> In article >>>>> <17c0fc54e55b8534$37200$3384359$c2d58868@news.newsdemon.com>, >>>>> moviePig wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 3/28/2024 12:11 AM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>> On Mar 27, 2024 at 8:05:40 PM PDT, "moviePig" wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 3/27/2024 7:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>> In article >>>>>>>>> <17c0c13d249c8eca$72548$1768716$4ad50060@news.newsdemon.com>, >>>>>>>>> moviePig wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2024 6:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> In article , >>>>>>>>>>> "Adam H. Kerman" wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Adam H. Kerman wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Last Friday, a Chicago alderman (there are cockroaches with higher >>>>>>>>>>>>>> social standing) gave a speech at a rally outside city hall >>>>>>>>>>>>>> condemning Biden and support for Israel in the war against Hamas. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> A veteran had burned a special American flag >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Why is it that burning the American flag is protected speech, but >>>>>>>>>>>>> if you burn an Alphabet Mafia rainbow flag, you can get arrested for >>>>>>>>>>>>> a hate crime? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> You mean a flag that does not belong to you, not your own flag. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> No, I mean any rainbow flag. If you go buy one yourself, then take it >>>>>>>>>>> to an anti-troon protest and burn it, it's a hate crime. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> But if you buy an American flag and take it to an Antifa riot and >>>>>>>>>>> burn it, protected speech. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The former action is one of hate, the latter is one of protest. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> What if the former is one of protest, too? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That'd be for a judge to be convinced of >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Since when do I have to convince the government of the reasons for my >>>>>>> speech to keep from being jailed for it? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Congress shall make no law..." >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ...who might ask, e.g., whether the defendant *knew* how the act would >>>>>>>> be perceived. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My right to free speech isn't dependent on how someone else-- with an >>>>>>> agenda of their own-- might perceive my words. >>>>>> >>>>>> Are you disputing laws against hate speech or how they're enforced? >>>>> >>>>> Both. Hate speech is protected speech per the Supreme Court and any laws >>>>> to the contrary are unconstitutional. >>>>> >>>>> National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. 43 >>>>> (1977) >>>> >>>> One cold night, a homeless man builds and lights a bonfire that destroys >>>> a family's manicured lawn. Elsewhere, a well-known redneck erects and >>>> burns a wooden cross, destroying the lawn of a black family. >>>> >>>> To your mind, are these infractions fully equivalent to each other? >>> >>> Those are crimes, not speech. You didn't ask about hate crimes. You asked >>> about hate speech. >> >> I'd have thought the two crimes to be materially identical, with the >> important difference being that one clearly contains "hate speech". >> > > The fun thing about "hate speech" is that it relies on interpretation. > It varies from person to person. *All* laws rely on interpretation. Every time.