So is the bile coming out of his mouth in the UK.
Lying isn’t illegal.
So is the bile coming out of his mouth in the UK.
I don't think anyone questioned the ability of team to do whatever with a player. The issue was if you are punishing a player for something that isn't against the rules. The NFL had no such rules against kneeling, so punishing for something that isn't considered officially wrong is a bit of an issue. The other issue of course was trying to add it to the rules without consulting the player's union which is against the CBA. Which is how we ended up with the proposed settlement that of course still didn't appease crap stirrer in chief.I would say that the consensus is fairly clear.
The act of kneeling itself is 100% protected.
The ability of a team to suspend, cut, etc. a player for kneeling is also protected.
The real question comes with whether Trump's admonishments and threats could somehow end up infringing on the kneeling. That's really the only area that the Constitution really comes into play.
So you are in favour of this purely because this time it happens to fit your agenda.
Amazing. I hope this comes round to bite you in the ass one day.
There's a compilation on Youtube of him threatening people and wishing ill on people. Totally a joke, he makes Donald Trump look like Mother Theresa. Can't imagine why he was banned![]()
And a conservaties way of censoring public opinion is to call it unpatriotic and treasonist.A liberals way of censoring public opinion is calling it hate speech.
I don't know much about the murder cases, but I can attest that Antifa is violent and should be considered a terrorist organization because that's what their strategy is. They've showed up in my city on numerous occasions to threaten with violence individuals and groups for peacefully expressing views, including the UC Berkeley Republican club (not that I like that club). They've followed through, attacking people and destroying lots of expensive property. They seem to avoid killing since it's not very effective – better to not make yourself a target to be shot on sight, and you can silence people by threatening their property instead.Haven’t read this yet - but will.
BUT, NPR? I’d be “darned” surprised if they actually agree that this is such.
That’s like Snopes doing an article on whether snopes is accurate or not...........
Update - read it and it’s as I suspected. And worse. Not only manipulating information to counter the argument that leftism is becoming more violent, but suggesting right is actually more violent.
Fact is, most shootings/murders by gun have been committed by people with either anti-right or far-left views. The article chooses to only look at statistics for “domestic-extremism” cases. Which, if you’re familiar with how this is categorized, then you know that info is skewed from the start.
Furthermore, the article blatantly groups anyone “not left leaning” with “neo-nazism.”
Like I said above - snopes verifying whether snopes is legit or not. You think you’d get an accurate answer???
Go try posting an opposing opinion on a right wing site and see how far you get. Hotair and redstate don’t even open registration. Hell redstate purged their own writing staff for not being sufficiently supportive of the President.
Townhall doesn’t close off registration but they are quick to ban for opposing views.
Plenty of left leaning people doing exactly the same yet they are still allowed on the platform.
I can’t imagine why...
So this is victim mentality, same as what conservatives use to blame people who complain about being treated unfairly based on race, income, etc.
So we're all hypocrites, which cancels it all out, so there's no problem here. It's all even!
Of all the people in favour of this, not one have answered me this:
What happens when it happens to someone you agree with?
Who determines what is hate speech? SJWs seem to label a lot of things by that phrase when they simply don't like the message.Up until today, I have no clude what Infowars or who Alex Jones were...
I know this is a great country where freedom of speech is permitted, but I never knew freedom of hatespeech is allowed too.
Understood. For whatever reason I don't have as much trouble with Apple removing his app as I do Twitter banning him.
But people keep saying that Alex Jones isn't just putting out a message. Allegedly he is actively calling on his audience to harass people, victims of tragedies and such. If that's true, that's not simply exercising free speech anymore, that's something different.
It's along the same lines as why the law draws a distinction between prejudice and discrimination. Prejudice is one's beliefs, but discrimination is acting on those beliefs.
Here's the problem. Fine. Ban Jones. Toss him. Whatever.Not a victim at all. Like I have said I don’t even agree with Jones.
I just feel that if a rule should be applied, it should be applied fairly and evenly.
But it isn’t. That’s my problem.
Merriam-Webster disagrees.
hate speech
noun
Legal Definition of hate speech
: speech that is intended to insult, offend, or intimidate a person because of some trait (as race, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, or disability)
Hate speech has nothing to do with free speech.Shame. Free speech is dead.
Hate speech has nothing to do with free speech.
Who's suppressing right wing opinion?Plenty of “hate speech” apps that remains on the platform. The rule isn’t applied evenly.
It is mainly right wing opinion that is being suppressed.
Be sure to report them to Apple so they can remove them then.Plenty of “hate speech” apps that remains on the platform. The rule isn’t applied evenly.
That's probably because mainly right wing nut crackers spew hate speech. Quite simple actually. But could you give us some examples of what exactly is being banned?It is mainly right wing opinion that is being suppressed.
Who's suppressing right wing opinion?
You may want to think twice about this one since the very same meme could be applied to the Right, no?