Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:50:52 +0000
From: BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Ketanji Jackson Worried That the 1st Amendment is Hamstringing Government Censorship
References: <AbGcneZpLeuJ12f4nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com> <17bede76861e0687$3579$3121036$c0d58a68@news.newsdemon.com> <atropos-6D853D.13234321032024@news.giganews.com> <utjor7$2snlm$1@dont-email.me> <sR2dnWhJhaAPdGD4nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com> <dc0tvil26o548mid7gub6olk07da5sprvh@4ax.com> <17bf6e37e6780b72$41800$3716115$2d54864@news.newsdemon.com>
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X)
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 10:58:27 -0700
Message-ID: <atropos-970DBC.10582723032024@news.giganews.com>
Lines: 25
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-4VDmMqSZucYslIy9L1rFppvWv9VM5MfacMrmOy8i2UkuXkbCzmxFNRbDqqTRbg+qdGJ3F3BtQYppmuN!LSM2NFVXBHIVvhFwqQRr4Y7iLEXPGh0DPOXuZGqwWBulkO73b/eU4dg5xIhl67sZmFhN1pssXvu8!XWM=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 2470

In article <17bf6e37e6780b72$41800$3716115$2d54864@news.newsdemon.com>,
 moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:

> On 3/23/2024 3:16 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> > On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 20:26:58 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> On Mar 22, 2024 at 4:08:21 AM PDT, "FPP" <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> No, I don't. Every time you bring that up, I ask you whether you think 
> >> that it'd be okay for the government to make exceptions to Amendment
> >> XIX and prohibit women from voting since "no amendment is sacrosanct",
> >> after all. Or since "no amendment is sacrosanct", it'd be okay for the
> >> government to prohibit black people from voting (Amendment XV) and
> >> allow people to be owned as slaves (Amendment XIII).
> >>
> >> And that's when *you* go into a coma.
> >>
> > In other words the "reductio ad absurdem" argument where one defeats
> > an argument by showing where the logical extension from it leads to an
> > absurdity.
> 
> "SOME amendments are sacrosanct", a theologism, is what's absurd here.

So explain how , for example, Amendment XIII might be acceptably 
regulated beyond it's plain text.