ONCE AGAIN, Democrats say the First Amendment is "not absolute"

a reply to: Justoneman

Then you do agree with the banning of certain books in public libraries, the banning of drag shows, and the banning of revenge porn and banning of pornography in public and or the banning of Critical Race Theory and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, or anything some of the local folks find repulsive, offensive or inciteful? You don't agree that the 1st Amendment is absolute and you think it must be regulated, on behalf of the children of course.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

So, you're saying that minors don't have a 1st Amendment right to read what they want, look at the art that want, listen to the music that they want, or otherwise self-express as they want?

Lol, we don’t let them smoke, drink, get tattoos, drive vehicles without a permit, enter the military without parent sign off.

Some of this world does run on common sense, though we know you hate that.

Giving 3-10 year old children sexually explicit books and images only has one goal, to recruit them into engaging in it. With adults. There’s no other rational “benefit”. Children these ages don’t know about nuance or shades of gray in art or literature. They are literally learning what basic art and literature are. So your false need to help them become 5 year old art aficionados and critics …… is nothing but disguised grooming.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
If the 1st Amendment is truly absolute, then you all disagree with the banning of certain books in public libraries, the banning of drag shows, and the banning of revenge porn and banning of pornography in public and or the banning of Critical Race Theory and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, or anything some of the local folks find repulsive, offensive or inciteful?

Why can't kids watch hard core porn? Do your grand children watch gay anal sex porn or straight up BDSM stuff?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Justoneman

Then you do agree with the banning of certain books in public libraries, the banning of drag shows, and the banning of revenge porn and banning of pornography in public and or the banning of Critical Race Theory and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, or anything some of the local folks find repulsive, offensive or inciteful? You don't agree that the 1st Amendment is absolute and you think it must be regulated, on behalf of the children of course.

When you’re snarky about protecting small children from predators, you should be very very sad about what you’ve become.
When you advocate for nasty old adults grinding their crotches and fake or real knockers in children’s faces, you should feel worse than sad.

a reply to: arcticshuffle

Lol, we don’t let them smoke, drink, get tattoos, drive vehicles without a permit, enter the military without parent sign off.

That's because the 1st Amendment isn't absolute.

a reply to: network dude

Why can't kids watch hard core porn?

They can't because the 1st Amendment isn't absolute.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Justoneman

Then you do agree with the banning of certain books in public libraries, the banning of drag shows, and the banning of revenge porn and banning of pornography in public and or the banning of Critical Race Theory and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, or anything some of the local folks find repulsive, offensive or inciteful? You don't agree that the 1st Amendment is absolute and you think it must be regulated, on behalf of the children of course.

Actually The First Amendment has nothing to do with it. 🤡

Your affirming the consequent strategy is wrong. 😃

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
If the 1st Amendment is truly absolute, then you all disagree with the banning of certain books in public libraries, the banning of drag shows, and the banning of revenge porn and banning of pornography in public and or the banning of Critical Race Theory and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, or anything some of the local folks find repulsive, offensive or inciteful?

Why can't kids watch hard core porn? Do your grand children watch gay anal sex porn or straight up BDSM stuff?

Reading what this person continually writes, you know the answer is yes. No limits for anything, any age. The thousands of kids “lost” at the border, sure appreciate her beliefs and advocacy for their sexual rights. MAP’s are just full of love for the little ones. And a 5 year-old has the right to show their love any way they want, with anyone they choose.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Commies don't seem to understand the difference between not providing something and censoring.

If some pedo wants read those books, they can go buy them. They just won't find them in taxpayer funded schools.

And just so everyone is aware, these are the books you're talking about.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: arcticshuffle

Lol, we don’t let them smoke, drink, get tattoos, drive vehicles without a permit, enter the military without parent sign off.

That's because the 1st Amendment isn't absolute.

a reply to: network dude

Why can't kids watch hard core porn?

They can't because the 1st Amendment isn't absolute.

You're trying to affirm a conclusion from a negative premise 🤓

The 1st Amendment is secondary in this case.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: arcticshuffle

Lol, we don’t let them smoke, drink, get tattoos, drive vehicles without a permit, enter the military without parent sign off.

That's because the 1st Amendment isn't absolute.

a reply to: network dude

Why can't kids watch hard core porn?

They can't because the 1st Amendment isn't absolute.

We’ve always had what you might call a”carve out” for crimes within expression of rights. 2nd guarantees you can have a gun as you choose. Well, except for that robbery/ murder thing.

1st sort of gets put on hold when someone is diddling children or grooming them for it.

So your continuing snark makes it clear that you think this is “unfair and dumb”.

Such a sad turn for a life to take.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Justoneman

Then you do agree with the banning of certain books in public libraries, the banning of drag shows, and the banning of revenge porn and banning of pornography in public and or the banning of Critical Race Theory and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, or anything some of the local folks find repulsive, offensive or inciteful? You don't agree that the 1st Amendment is absolute and you think it must be regulated, on behalf of the children of course.

You are placing the actions of the first amendment as what is to be acted upon by law. What I mean is that the trans people have the right to express themselves, the writers of explicit pornography have the right to publish their works, In fact all the actions of the people you cite here and much more IS covered and protected by the first amendment. When societal discretion determines that any of what you expressed runs afoul of laws, also based on the U.S. Constitution, then each transgression is determined to be lawful or unlawful usually in a court of law.

All that being said, I don't agree with 99.9% of what you write here; but, I will defend your right, to the death, to say it.
I took an oath when I was 18 and I truly believe that I still carry that oath to this day...

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Justoneman

Then you do agree with the banning of certain books in public libraries, the banning of drag shows, and the banning of revenge porn and banning of pornography in public and or the banning of Critical Race Theory and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, or anything some of the local folks find repulsive, offensive or inciteful? You don't agree that the 1st Amendment is absolute and you think it must be regulated, on behalf of the children of course.

There’s just something so filthy about sneeringly saying “oh haha protecting the children, yeah right, so important, makes you so pure and good …..”

a reply to: NightFlight

When societal discretion determines that any of what you expressed runs afoul of laws, also based on the U.S. Constitution, then each transgression is determined to be lawful or unlawful usually in a court of law.

And, those 'laws" allow the government to limit 1st Amendment rights and prosecute those that break the law.

a reply to: xuenchen

You're trying to affirm a conclusion from a negative premise

Isn't that exactly what the OP is trying to do?

a reply to: ColeYounger2

Everything I don't like is a threat democracy... unless it's revoking a policy that I've used hundreds of times just prior, stacking a court in my favor, pulling fire alarms to avoid a vote, removing competition from ballots without authority, changing election laws and procedures without authority, colluding with tech AND media AND intelligence officials to bury a story and influence an election, and censor all dissent. Now THAT'S democracy! Oh, wait. That's fascism. Good thing changing the definitions, or forgetting them altogether, is also democracy!

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Interesting. I always thought showing your kids my bare butt was protected. At least theres certainly a demograohic that thinks so. Maybe it allows for children tocread books about performing oral sex on old men? Libs think so! Does it also apply to dissent? Because that's what liberals have done, and continue to do. Pick a lane.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: xuenchen

You're trying to affirm a conclusion from a negative premise

Isn't that exactly what the OP is trying to do?

Now you're escalating your commitment. You're stuck in your own endless loop catch22 😀

originally posted by: NightFlight

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Justoneman

Then you do agree with the banning of certain books in public libraries, the banning of drag shows, and the banning of revenge porn and banning of pornography in public and or the banning of Critical Race Theory and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, or anything some of the local folks find repulsive, offensive or inciteful? You don't agree that the 1st Amendment is absolute and you think it must be regulated, on behalf of the children of course.

You are placing the actions of the first amendment as what is to be acted upon by law. What I mean is that the trans people have the right to express themselves, the writers of explicit pornography have the right to publish their works, In fact all the actions of the people you cite here and much more IS covered and protected by the first amendment. When societal discretion determines that any of what you expressed runs afoul of laws, also based on the U.S. Constitution, then each transgression is determined to be lawful or unlawful usually in a court of law.

All that being said, I don't agree with 99.9% of what you write here; but, I will defend your right, to the death, to say it.
I took an oath when I was 18 and I truly believe that I still carry that oath to this day...

Lots of colloquialisms enter into this discussion.

Your right to swing your arms ends where my body begins.

Your right to scream fire or bomb or gun, ends in this room crammed full of people.

Your right to make and eat up all the porn you want, ends where it’s clearly helping to pursue pedophilia and grooming. Or keeps harassing other people’s children.

Every type of common decency can’t be perfectly qualified in written laws. We need to expect adults to have some amount of honor or respect or caring for things other than themselves , that will supplement or bolster laws. To have no ability to do this ….. is to be a sociopath.

a reply to: xuenchen

The only loop here is that all logic comes back to the truth, that the 1st Amendment isn't absolute in our society.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

You still don't understand the first amendment do you?

Say for example, I am in a very crowded theater and I jump up and yell FIRE! I have every right to express myself at that time, however while someone was exiting the theater to escape the "fire" that was alarmed, they were crushed and killed. I was identified as the culprit who yelled the alarm and arrested NOT for first amendment violations but causing the death of a theater goer, involuntary manslaughter. Just like the books you keep bringing up they were published under the right of the first amendment, Their private use among adults is legal, but their use or abuse elsewhere as prescribed by law has broken those laws.
I also realize that you and others here are card carrying communists and are trying your best to abolish the United States Constitution, starting with the first and second amendments to our God given Bill of Rights.