Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Inconvenient lefties
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2024 09:38:27 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <kc851jtee008ar69a148vl0t2s2nr4561c@4ax.com>
References: <utks3h$35980$1@dont-email.me> <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> <atropos-A4D504.11411606042024@kd014101080069.ppp-bb.dion.ne.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2024 13:38:28 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ae93369674d7abc83092727db4f8d031";
	logging-data="2947738"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18QugdPBfwykWJvRjpoWK4+WH6aoE4nlnI="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xSxiZ6FCaYx7p4XrTcPPwweFg58=
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 3.3/32.846
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 240407-2, 4/7/2024), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Bytes: 2898

On Sat, 06 Apr 2024 11:41:16 -0700, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>In article <17c3b829d977a4bb$361$1351842$40d50a60@news.newsdemon.com>,
> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/5/2024 7:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> > On Apr 5, 2024 at 3:57:07 PM PDT, "moviePig" <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>> > 
>> >> On 4/5/2024 4:30 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> >>>   moviePig <never@nothere.com> 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.

And you've just pointed out the problem with today's libs.  They
insist that facts don't exist and their opinion is reality.  A man can
be a woman is the perfect example of this.