Is Free Speech Under Attack in this Country?

maxresdefault.jpg





Here's a picture of the government protecting civil rights. The government doesn't give us rights, we only have the rights we fight for and demand from them. The constitution means nothing when the people who interpret it are biased and almost all of them are biased in favor of the government.
 
yes, we did/do need government to protect citizens from Jim Crow.

There is a poster here , I forget who, with a family member that was either prosecutor or investigator on the capture and conviction of the Birmingham Church bombings of the 1960's that killed 4 girls

That too would be government.
.......................................................

It's tiresome and lazy to yell government every time one arm of government goes awry only for another arm to correct.
Government is such a broad brush

Today government is Adam Shiff and Devin Nunes
..................

The era you pictured above was for conversation sake Alabama. At the same time the state and local government was involved in these beatings etc the federal government was making the correction
 
Thats funny considering federal marijuana prohibition is a Jim Crow law. Louisiana also still has some Jim Crow laws like requiring only 10 of 12 jurors to vote guilty for felony convictions. Government is just the tool the majority force their will on the minority. The constitution is supposed to protect the minority but the majority just get their own judges into the key positions who then rule in favor of the majority's ability to oppress the minority.
 
By that token you should love AOC exchanges with Equifax this past week.

Your issue doesnt appear to be the institution of government per se but the people we allow to make the decisions and administer them ?

Your stance on Citizens United ?
Gerrymandered district's and voter supression ?
 
cajunrevenge said:
Thats funny considering federal marijuana prohibition is a Jim Crow law. Louisiana also still has some Jim Crow laws like requiring only 10 of 12 jurors to vote guilty for felony convictions. Government is just the tool the majority force their will on the minority. The constitution is supposed to protect the minority but the majority just get their own judges into the key positions who then rule in favor of the majority's ability to oppress the minority.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don’t really know about that. A lot of Jim Crow-era laws, and earlier ones designed to underpin white supremacy, were made to enable minority rule, in case the large black populations of the Confederate states ever coalesced into a political force.

Look at the current situation: two of the last five presidential elections have been won by candidates who lost the popular vote. Judicial appointments were stalled by a Republican Senate that represented a decided minority of voters, through the filibuster, through the blue-slip process, etc. Now that there’s a Republican President, one who lost the popular vote, the blue-slip process is being ignored. The process is largely being subverted by the minority, not being tyrannized by the majority. There’s no real debate that, in pure numerical terms, more people vote for D politicians. Yet the federal judiciary has been stacked with conservatives because of a very successful long-term effort to exploit the inequality inherent in the system. And, to give them their due they’ve done quite well. Focus on statehouses, draw the districts to your advantage. Use your inherent advantage in the least small-d democratic institution, the Senate, to stack the courts, which will provide a backstop against reform. The problem right now is the reality of minority rule—as expressed in Wisconsin, NC, etc, as well as in the electoral college—not majority rule.
 
i haven't read this thread

mostly cause i hate fake outrage and fake prosecution from fake freedom lovers

but i see this will be the 88th post and i hope somehow this has already been covered but


no

it isn't under attack

anyone that says otherwise is a grade a idiot like the president and his followers
 
Gosh. Would hate to have views expressed that challenge the status quo of the groupthink at a prestigious campus

[Tw]1108370967066222592[/tw]
 
you argue that a cake baker in Indiana has the right to serve whom he pleases as it suits your political purposes.
Or Drs. are morally damned for practicing a procedure

yet a book store half way across the world draws your ire.
gotcha
 
57Brave said:
you argue that a cake baker in Indiana has the right to serve whom he pleases as it suits your political purposes.
Or Drs. are morally damned for practicing a procedure

yet a book store half way across the world draws your ire.
gotcha
Click to expand...

Yes. Banning thought and speech catches my eye
 
mqt said:
So if the market dictates that Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson’s views on certain topics/groups is unacceptable, is that not a failure of their personal brands? Shouldn’t we be celebrating the market dictating that failure?
Click to expand...

Shapiro's book is #1 on NY Times non-fiction (I haven't read it nor have any interest in reading it)

I can assure you his censorship is not a free market dynamic
 
Whenever I scroll and see this title I wonder how can it be that you had never heard of Lenny Bruce
 
hard hitting stuff here man

so thankful the commies haven't won yet so we could point out these great examples of persecution
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top