Re: Inconvenient lefties

In article <uuotqv$1d3sl$2@dont-email.me>, fredp1571@gmail.com wrote:

On 4/4/24 9:08 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:

On 4/4/24 3:32 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:

On 4/3/24 2:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

"moviePig" <never@nothere.com> wrote:

On 4/3/2024 5:50 AM, FPP wrote:

    On 4/2/24 5:52 PM, moviePig wrote:

    On 4/2/2024 1:16 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

    BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

    Mar 27, 2024 at 3:58:45 PM PDT, moviePig <never@nothere.com>:

    3/27/2024 6:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

    Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:

    BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

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.

>

https://ibb.co/0FpvG4S

>
moviePig is unparseable here. Is he stating that protestors
protest against their friends and not their enemies? I'm so
confused.

>
I'm here to help.
>
In general, people who burn an American flag do so in protest of
their own government's actions and policies, while those who burn
a rainbow flag do so to express their hate of queers.

   
If you own it, you can burn it.

>
But not at a gay-pride march under laws against hate speech.

>
There are no laws against hate speech in the United States. If any
legislature should pass such a law, it would be unconstitutional.

>

That was in the old Constitution. You know... the one Roberts, Alito,
IKavanaugh, and Barret swore up and down they would go by.
And then didn't.
>
Settled law, my ass. Alito quoted a 17th century Witch Hunter in his
draft opinion on Roe (Dobbs).

             TROLL-O-METER
 
              5*    6*   *7
         4*                  *8
      3*                        *9
     2*                          *10
    1*              |             *stuporous
    0*             -*-            *catatonic
     *              |\            *comatose
      *               \          *clinical death
       *               \        *biological death
         *             _\/    *demonic apparition
             *     *     *damned for all eternity
 

Did he? That's awesome!
>

Fuck this Illegitimate Supreme Court of Religious Fanatics.

>
This Supreme Court has reinforced free speech over government control
and sanction at nearly every opportunity, so regardless of whether
you're mentally fucking them or not (shudder), don't look for them to
suddenly embrace the notion of carving out a heretofore never before
noticed exception to the 1st Amendment and allow the government to start
suddenly punishing people for 'hate speech'.

 

And your approval of them embracing a 17th century witch hunter tells us
everything we need to know

 
I think it's hilariously awesome. I wish he'd cited Skynet, too!

>
Yeah, I kinda thought you would believe rape is "awesome".
Just surprised you admit to it.

In other words, you have lost another debate.

Ad hominem noted.
Strawman noted.

Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.

--
Let's go Brandon!