SchmaltzWeasel Posted June 2, 2017 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 1 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 187 Content Per Day: 0.07 Reputation: 141 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/29/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted June 2, 2017 1 minute ago, Running Gator said: That may well be, time will tell what the courts choose to do. But I would rather be wrong on the side of freedom than the side of oppression. You're not on the side of freedom in defending Griffin. You're on the side of a message calling for the beheading of the president you're post history shows you hold in contempt. Which means you're not even on the side of free democratic election results that can be left alone without assailing the peoples and God's choice for the next four years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Gator Posted June 2, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.69 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted June 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, SchmaltzWeasel said: He's misrepresenting what the defendant in the SCOTUS case actually did say in order to arrive at a SCOTUS decision judging what he said. The antagonist role is getting really old. And weak. this is twice in one day you have accused me of presenting false data and twice you were wrong. I would ask you nicely and as one Christian to another, to quit making false accusations against me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Gator Posted June 2, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.69 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted June 2, 2017 Just now, SchmaltzWeasel said: You're not on the side of freedom in defending Griffin. You're on the side of a message calling for the beheading of the president you're post history shows you hold in contempt. Which means you're not even on the side of free democratic election results that can be left alone without assailing the peoples and God's choice for the next four years. I am not defending Griffin, I have condemned what she did. I am defending free speech, even if I do not like it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SchmaltzWeasel Posted June 2, 2017 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 1 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 187 Content Per Day: 0.07 Reputation: 141 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/29/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted June 2, 2017 11 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: Where does the SCOTUS claim that something like what Griffin did is protected speech? They didn't. They can't. Linked proof One example in a Virginia court VIRGINIA v. BLACK et al., (2003) That case concerned a cross being burned on a homes yard. Implying a death threat. If that's not protected as free speech, holding up the bloody grotesquely severed head of our president sure isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SchmaltzWeasel Posted June 2, 2017 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 1 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 187 Content Per Day: 0.07 Reputation: 141 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/29/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted June 2, 2017 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Running Gator said: this is twice in one day you have accused me of presenting false data and twice you were wrong. I would ask you nicely and as one Christian to another, to quit making false accusations against me. I'm not making false accusations against a Christian. I'm exposing an agenda that is wrong on its face. Anyone not hating Trump can tell the prior case has not one semblance of relationship to what Griffin did. Not one. And that's why it is not protected speech. Nor is it an example of freedom! Death threats are protected speech. That's obscene to even try to convince people of. Edited June 2, 2017 by SchmaltzWeasel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wingnut- Posted June 2, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 39 Topic Count: 101 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 7,673 Content Per Day: 1.31 Reputation: 7,358 Days Won: 67 Joined: 04/22/2008 Status: Offline Share Posted June 2, 2017 10 minutes ago, SchmaltzWeasel said: Death threats aren't free speech. She's a comedian, she isn't supposed to be taken seriously. Those who do take her seriously are already of the same mind set anyway, they simply hate the President because they swallow whatever nonsense the media or Hollywood types spout. The point is, they already think that way, she isn't inciting anything, just following the predictable protocol of those who hate anyone that thinks differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, Running Gator said: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/394/705/case.html Okay, but that's not the same thing. She is not indulging in crude political hyperbole. This goes much, much further than this and the SS rightfully has her under investigation. This is not protected speech. Her jokes and insults of the president are protected. She can call the president any name in she can think of, and it is protected. What she did in this video is not protected, by any stretch of the imagination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 1 minute ago, wingnut- said: She's a comedian, she isn't supposed to be taken seriously. Those who do take her seriously are already of the same mind set anyway, they simply hate the President because they swallow whatever nonsense the media or Hollywood types spout. The point is, they already think that way, she isn't inciting anything, just following the predictable protocol of those who hate anyone that thinks differently. It is 10 years in prison and a $150,000 fine even if you don't mean it. There is no sense of humor attached to what Griffin did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SchmaltzWeasel Posted June 2, 2017 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 1 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 187 Content Per Day: 0.07 Reputation: 141 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/29/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted June 2, 2017 1 minute ago, wingnut- said: She's a comedian, she isn't supposed to be taken seriously. Those who do take her seriously are already of the same mind set anyway, they simply hate the President because they swallow whatever nonsense the media or Hollywood types spout. The point is, they already think that way, she isn't inciting anything, just following the predictable protocol of those who hate anyone that thinks differently. So you laughed at that? You defend it as comedy. Please tell me, what's so funny about president Trump having his head cut off? I would never link the images available that shows what ISIS has done . But would you chuckle at that and call it comedy? She knew what she was doing was wrong. The video of her premeditating this production proves that in her own words. The court in Virginia said someone burning a cross on a black family's lawn , when that cross at one time meant those family members were going to be killed at the hands of the KKK, is not free speech. Would you chuckle if a comedian burned a cross on the lawn of the Obama's new home? Would you call that comedy? It's no more comedy when Griffin holds up the severed head of our current president. Two pieces of wood burning isn't protected free speech. Holding up a current presidents bloody severed head is not either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SchmaltzWeasel Posted June 2, 2017 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 1 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 187 Content Per Day: 0.07 Reputation: 141 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/29/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted June 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: It is 10 years in prison and a $150,000 fine even if you don't mean it. There is no sense of humor attached to what Griffin did. In a world of equal justice that's exactly what she'd pay. In both punishments. The fine and the time. Dare to Google ISIS beheading's. Is that comedy? Of course not. But someone defends it is, when a woman holds up the head of our president? And the look on her face? Even she wasn't laughing at her own stunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts