one.opinion Posted October 30, 2018 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,240 Content Per Day: 2.09 Reputation: 1,356 Days Won: 4 Joined: 07/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted October 30, 2018 9 minutes ago, ayin jade said: Huge difference between public govt funded campuses and private campuses. The right to free speech is guaranteed in public govt spaces. Absolutely right, I should have remembered this. Thanks for the correction. Where this gets a little messy is when students claim to feel threatened or harassed, which does put a legal limit on the free speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one.opinion Posted October 30, 2018 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,240 Content Per Day: 2.09 Reputation: 1,356 Days Won: 4 Joined: 07/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted October 30, 2018 14 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: Sure it can. EOs don't make law. They enforce existing law and since the EO is using the wording of the amendment, and is not circumventing or canceling any part of the amendment, it is perfectly legal. This is not about changing the amendment, but changing how it is applied. And that does not require Congress. It is changing the Amendment and contradicting legal precedent. Let me ask again - are you sure you really want to open the door for EO to reinterpret Amendments to the Constitution? What if some future President decided reinterpret the Second Amendment and stated that citizens could only carry muskets henceforward? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 1sheep Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 43 minutes ago, one.opinion said: Have you ever seen the Right when anyone mentions gun regulations? People get a little perturbed when they feel Constitutional rights are threatened. Does the right riot and call it protest? Does the right distrupt congressional meetings with screaming and yelling? Does the right bully leftists politicians that are only trying to eat a meal in a restaurant? Did the right shoot a leftist senator? No. That was a leftist targeting to kill a republican. I could go on and on and on with examples over the last 2 yrs. Getting perturbed doesnt mean violence or bullying with the right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 1sheep Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 22 minutes ago, one.opinion said: Absolutely right, I should have remembered this. Thanks for the correction. Where this gets a little messy is when students claim to feel threatened or harassed, which does put a legal limit on the free speech. Which is why they now have crying rooms and coloring books and teddy bears. It nuts! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 1sheep Posted October 30, 2018 Share Posted October 30, 2018 43 minutes ago, one.opinion said: 1. This is getting a little away from the OP. 2. What do you think would happen if someone wanted to discuss gender flexibility on the Bob Jones University campus? Campuses have the right to decide who can speak publicly and where. Limiting free speech would mean making certain forms of speech illegal - don't get me wrong, some forms of speech are indeed illegal - but campuses regulating speech is NOT limiting free speech. One could literally cross the street and start right up again. Was that semantics? Give me a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 37 minutes ago, one.opinion said: It is changing the Amendment and contradicting legal precedent. No, it is not. The Amendment only applies to children of legal residence. It only applied when it was written, to children of slaves. It did not apply to illegal aliens Quote Let me ask again - are you sure you really want to open the door for EO to reinterpret Amendments to the Constitution? It's not a reinterpretation. It is taking the wording of Amendment and applying it the way it was supposed to be applied all along. It ends the abuse of the Amendment and the exploitation of it by those who want to come here and live off of the backs of American taxpayers. Quote What if some future President decided reinterpret the Second Amendment and stated that citizens could only carry muskets henceforward? That is not analogous to this. This is not a reinterpretation of an Amendment. It is returning to the original intent of the Amendment and the proper application of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadyKay Posted October 31, 2018 Group: Royal Member Followers: 12 Topic Count: 385 Topics Per Day: 0.10 Content Count: 7,692 Content Per Day: 1.92 Reputation: 4,809 Days Won: 3 Joined: 05/28/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted October 31, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Sojourner414 said: On that note- we already have the loss of freedom of speech in this country: it's called Political Correctness, brought to you by Liberals. Has anyone ever been arrested for political incorrectness? Just wondering. Edited October 31, 2018 by LadyKay 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted October 31, 2018 Share Posted October 31, 2018 1 hour ago, one.opinion said: Have you ever seen the Right when anyone mentions gun regulations? People get a little perturbed when they feel Constitutional rights are threatened. Because the "gun regulations" from the Left is about eventual gun confiscation, not simply regulation. One of the beginning phases of tyranny is disarming the citizens. Gun regulation is all about eventual confiscation. Everyone knows that there is no way that gun regulations will make us safer. They are about restricting the freedoms of gun owners who obey the law. Teh first things liberals want to do when there is a mass shooting is restrict the freedom of 60 million gun owners who have never shot anybody. If someone runs down a crowd of people and kills a bunch of people in a Ford Mustang, would we decide to "regulate" Ford Mustangs? Would we blame the car or the driver? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadyKay Posted October 31, 2018 Group: Royal Member Followers: 12 Topic Count: 385 Topics Per Day: 0.10 Content Count: 7,692 Content Per Day: 1.92 Reputation: 4,809 Days Won: 3 Joined: 05/28/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted October 31, 2018 4 hours ago, Yowm said: Including being born by illegals? Yep. Including that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadyKay Posted October 31, 2018 Group: Royal Member Followers: 12 Topic Count: 385 Topics Per Day: 0.10 Content Count: 7,692 Content Per Day: 1.92 Reputation: 4,809 Days Won: 3 Joined: 05/28/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted October 31, 2018 4 hours ago, Yowm said: It seems like many of you are crying 'Foul!' over Trumps EO, claiming it runs counter to the 14th Amendment. Why charge Trump guilty? Let the Supreme Court decide. That's what they are there for. Because I can read and see what the Amendment says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts