User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 48

Thread: Astonishing California bill would shut down free speech, require fact-checkers

  1. #11
    Original Ranter
    Points: 165,474, Level: 96
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 176
    Overall activity: 74.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdriveTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    MMC's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    41178
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Posts
    40,531
    Points
    165,474
    Level
    96
    Thanks Given
    13,131
    Thanked 10,169x in 7,708 Posts
    Mentioned
    64 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Can't we force Californification to opt out of the Country. Lets take away their airports and build a wall around the state.
    Don't only Practice your Art, but force your way into its Secrets, For it and Knowledge can Raise men to the Divine!!!!! Ludwig Van Beethoven ~

  2. #12
    Points: 99,553, Level: 76
    Level completed: 85%, Points required for next Level: 397
    Overall activity: 4.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Crepitus's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    1253763
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Wichita, KS
    Posts
    35,875
    Points
    99,553
    Level
    76
    Thanks Given
    16,015
    Thanked 11,988x in 8,714 Posts
    Mentioned
    423 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DGUtley View Post
    It chills free speech. Period.
    That depends on the definition of free speech. Are lies and slander free speech?
    Attention:

    The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves.

    That Is All.

  3. #13

    tPF Moderator
    Points: 50,866, Level: 55
    Level completed: 12%, Points required for next Level: 1,684
    Overall activity: 34.0%
    Achievements:
    Recommendation Second ClassSocial50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class1 year registered
    DGUtley's Avatar tPF Moderator
    Karma
    165208
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    12,789
    Points
    50,866
    Level
    55
    Thanks Given
    4,754
    Thanked 10,470x in 6,042 Posts
    Mentioned
    390 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Crepitus View Post
    That depends on the definition of free speech. Are lies and slander free speech?
    Yes. One is free to lie and slander but must face the consequences of same. There are times where a court will issue an injunction if irreparable harm will occur if someone is allowed to say something about someone -- like, for example, if I wanted to call you a "constitutional literalist". You might consider that libelous. You could go to court and argue that me saying that would cause you irreparable harm. This government putting content conditions on speech is very bad. Remember, it is the most offensive of speech that is the most worthy of protection.
    Any time you give a man something he doesn't earn, you cheapen him. Our kids earn what they get, and that includes respect. -- Woody Hayes​

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DGUtley For This Useful Post:

    Cannons Front (04-16-2018),MMC (04-16-2018)

  5. #14
    Points: 50,885, Level: 55
    Level completed: 13%, Points required for next Level: 1,665
    Overall activity: 11.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger First ClassSocial50000 Experience Points1 year registered
    stjames1_53's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    38550
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    18,518
    Points
    50,885
    Level
    55
    Thanks Given
    32,705
    Thanked 9,566x in 6,919 Posts
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    the liberals would be screaming bloody murder if this rule was going to be applied to them as well..........
    For waltky: http://quakes.globalincidentmap.com/
    "The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools."
    - Thucydides

    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote" B. Franklin
    Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum

  6. #15
    Points: 430,367, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 86.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    393247
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    142,192
    Points
    430,367
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    14,018
    Thanked 40,815x in 30,206 Posts
    Mentioned
    1659 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    That's somewhat the difference between a libertarian/conservative definition of liberty and a liberal one. One should be free to speak and face consequences. One should be free to make mistakes, including what others consider lies and fake news. Making mistakes is how we learn to constrain ourselves in self-government. On the liberal view that freedom comes not from the self but is the purview of the government, a centralized few dictating what is true and shutting down what isn't...or what doesn't serve the interests of the elite.
    Edmund Burke: "In vain you tell me that Artificial Government is good, but that I fall out only with the Abuse. The Thing! the Thing itself is the Abuse!"

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Chris For This Useful Post:

    MMC (04-16-2018)

  8. #16
    Points: 50,885, Level: 55
    Level completed: 13%, Points required for next Level: 1,665
    Overall activity: 11.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger First ClassSocial50000 Experience Points1 year registered
    stjames1_53's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    38550
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    18,518
    Points
    50,885
    Level
    55
    Thanks Given
    32,705
    Thanked 9,566x in 6,919 Posts
    Mentioned
    72 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It's like long guns. the liberals state they only want the AR's today. Once they've gotten that, they'll be after pistols. Look to MA where they have officially stolen people's 2nd A Rights to possess any mean looking long guns..they are also after handguns that carry more rounds than a six-shooter. Next it will be six-shooters. then it will be illegal to own any guns.
    The 1st A will be treated the same way.
    Why on earth would anyone surrender their Rights, any of them, to a government that has been known to despise the people they desire to lord over
    For waltky: http://quakes.globalincidentmap.com/
    "The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools."
    - Thucydides

    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote" B. Franklin
    Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to stjames1_53 For This Useful Post:

    Grokmaster (04-16-2018)

  10. #17
    Points: 97,484, Level: 76
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 2,466
    Overall activity: 99.5%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsTagger Second ClassSocialVeteran
    MisterVeritis's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    283386
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Madison
    Posts
    47,159
    Points
    97,484
    Level
    76
    Thanks Given
    33,769
    Thanked 14,747x in 11,443 Posts
    Mentioned
    205 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Crepitus View Post
    The way I read it, nobody is saying it can't be said. Just that you can't call it news if it doesn't pass a good faith attempt at fact checking.
    Hmmm. Government approved news. What could possibly go wrong?
    Call your state legislators and insist they approve the Article V convention of States to propose amendments.

  11. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to MisterVeritis For This Useful Post:

    DGUtley (04-16-2018),Grokmaster (04-16-2018),stjames1_53 (04-16-2018)

  12. #18
    Points: 97,484, Level: 76
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 2,466
    Overall activity: 99.5%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsTagger Second ClassSocialVeteran
    MisterVeritis's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    283386
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Madison
    Posts
    47,159
    Points
    97,484
    Level
    76
    Thanks Given
    33,769
    Thanked 14,747x in 11,443 Posts
    Mentioned
    205 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Crepitus View Post
    That depends on the definition of free speech. Are lies and slander free speech?
    In my opinion, you are making the same argument that our board's geniuses have been making about the Syrian war of choice. Did the President trample on the Constitution? It depends on what the meaning of war is.

    Our geniuses are willing to blur the lines between what is a Constitutional act and what is not because they want to support the President's war-making without the inconvenience of hearing the Peoples' voices.

    In your case, you blur the lines because you want to squash any news the Left does not approve.

    In short, you and the Geniuses are doing the same thing.
    Call your state legislators and insist they approve the Article V convention of States to propose amendments.

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to MisterVeritis For This Useful Post:

    Grokmaster (04-16-2018),stjames1_53 (04-16-2018)

  14. #19
    Points: 99,553, Level: 76
    Level completed: 85%, Points required for next Level: 397
    Overall activity: 4.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Crepitus's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    1253763
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Wichita, KS
    Posts
    35,875
    Points
    99,553
    Level
    76
    Thanks Given
    16,015
    Thanked 11,988x in 8,714 Posts
    Mentioned
    423 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DGUtley View Post
    Yes. One is free to lie and slander but must face the consequences of same. There are times where a court will issue an injunction if irreparable harm will occur if someone is allowed to say something about someone -- like, for example, if I wanted to call you a "constitutional literalist". You might consider that libelous. You could go to court and argue that me saying that would cause you irreparable harm. This government putting content conditions on speech is very bad. Remember, it is the most offensive of speech that is the most worthy of protection.
    Some of the junk being passed off as news by people like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones is the equivalent of yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. That is not protected speech.
    Attention:

    The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves.

    That Is All.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Crepitus For This Useful Post:

    Grokmaster (04-16-2018)

  16. #20
    Points: 99,553, Level: 76
    Level completed: 85%, Points required for next Level: 397
    Overall activity: 4.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Crepitus's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    1253763
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Wichita, KS
    Posts
    35,875
    Points
    99,553
    Level
    76
    Thanks Given
    16,015
    Thanked 11,988x in 8,714 Posts
    Mentioned
    423 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by stjames1_53 View Post
    the liberals would be screaming bloody murder if this rule was going to be applied to them as well..........
    Please show me where it said it will only be applied to conservatives.
    Attention:

    The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves.

    That Is All.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


Critical Acclaim
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO