- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:03 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
Most notably Chicken Curry Clinton (Haley)
Has Trump used that nickname? Or is it not childish enough for him. MAGA needs some new entertainment material. That’s what matters in a president.
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:03 pm to Godfather1
Okay, I should not have to go to such lengths to ridicule such a ridiculous OP, but here goes. We have the constitutional right to freedom of religion, just as we do for free speech. Yet when we give money to the practitioners of religion we can deduct it from our taxable income. Why can't we do the same when we give money to the practitioners of free speech?
You see? This is a foolish attempt to establish parallelism among the various treatments of our constitutional rights. There is no parallelism, nor should there be.
You see? This is a foolish attempt to establish parallelism among the various treatments of our constitutional rights. There is no parallelism, nor should there be.
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:03 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Understood brah. You have no interest in actually discussing the issue.
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:04 pm to Timeoday
Isn’t that what copyright is?
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:05 pm to Indefatigable
Is that you, Clarence? Was that complete and total destruction?



Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:05 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Understood brah. You have no interest in actually discussing the issue.
I don't think you do understand, sport.
I'll discuss the issue. I'm just not interested in your discussion. You've already admitted that you were trying to pivot the discussion away from my original post, and you expect me to jump in with you.
Nah. I'm good.
Now, if you want to discuss why you're such a fricking Fudd...
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:07 pm to Timeoday
Careful with the emojis...
Indefuddigable doesn't like those.

Indefuddigable doesn't like those.


Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:08 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
You've already admitted that you were trying to pivot the discussion away from my original post, and you expect me to jump in with you.
It’s not your thread, dude. My question to you was directly on point with the OP, which is comparing various enumerated rights and how they are treated.
And as I said, I asked you the question (which I had already posed generally) because I know how you feel on the Second Amendment. My MASSIVE mistake for wanting to have a conversation.
This post was edited on 5/14/24 at 2:10 pm
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:09 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
“Congress shall make no law” and “shall not be infringed”
Why the markedly different phraseology, you think?
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:14 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
Why the markedly different phraseology, you think?
A good question I don’t know the answer to—hence my apparently misguided attempt to get input on that very issue. I’ve always found it odd that the BoR employs a variety of language in that regard as opposed to a standard framework.
But then again, I’m from Louisiana so like my laws uniform and codified

This post was edited on 5/14/24 at 2:16 pm
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:15 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
It’s not your thread, dude.
It isn't yours either, sport.
Here you go:
quote:
and you expect me to jump in with you.
I ignored your question because it was irrelevant and already answered. It's your problem if you don't like that, not mine.
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:16 pm to TN Tygah
quote:
Has Trump used that nickname? Or is it not childish enough for him. MAGA needs some new entertainment material. That’s what matters in a president.
Maybe you should demand that I provide my name and address like she did.
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:16 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Call it irrelevant all you want, but it hasn’t been answered until someone answers it.
Posting my own comments and emojis will never constitute answering the question.
Posting my own comments and emojis will never constitute answering the question.
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:19 pm to Penrod
quote:
Yet when we give money to the practitioners of religion we can deduct it from our taxable income. Why can't we do the same when we give money to the practitioners of free speech?
I know, I know, I know. Just create The Church of Free Speech.

This post was edited on 5/14/24 at 2:20 pm
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:20 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Call it irrelevant all you want
I will, because it is.
quote:
it hasn’t been answered
You answered it.
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:23 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Isn’t that what copyright is?
Can you explain what happens when your copyright is infringed?
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:24 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
You answered it.
Got it. So you agree the analysis is the same between the first and second amendments and that enumerated rights can be reasonably restricted as long as the restriction is narrowly tailored to a legitimate governmental purpose.
This post was edited on 5/14/24 at 2:25 pm
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:24 pm to Penrod
quote:
Why can't we do the same when we give money to the practitioners of free speech?
You can if they are doing so as a 503c non-profit organization, and you can't if the religion isn't being practiced through one.
Strike two.
Posted on 5/14/24 at 2:25 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Got it.
Well, it's about fricking time...

quote:
So you agree the analysis is the same between the first and second amendments and that enumerated rights can be reasonably restricted as long as the restriction is narrowly tailored to a legitimate governmental purpose.
Nope.
This post was edited on 5/14/24 at 2:27 pm
Popular
Back to top
