Excellent decision against Alex Jones
Re: Excellent decision against Alex Jones
It's a Khmer dictatorship. That simple.Anchor Moy wrote: ↑Sat Aug 06, 2022 9:32 pm @rabbitoh So how do you feel about the local politics then ? Do you think that they are lefties or righties ? What's your take on the local stuff ?,,,
After all, this is what counts on the ground.
Re: Excellent decision against Alex Jones
Ouch..., your PhD in rhetorics, and all the other extensive knowledge you've shown so far, leaves me speachless. I read in amazement how you come up with the sharpest reasoning on this forum with apparently the biggest ease of all.. Kudos!
-
- Expatriate
- Posts: 13458
- Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 11:37 pm
- Reputation: 3974
Re: Excellent decision against Alex Jones
Yeah, ok,rabbitoh, you joined CEO 3 weeks ago, but until now none of your posts have anything to do with Cambodia.
Troll ???
Troll ???
Re: Excellent decision against Alex Jones
^Kammekor, So you have a degree in Communications then?
And the sock Anchor using the big T word.
You also need to slow your reading and tune your observations.
And the sock Anchor using the big T word.
You also need to slow your reading and tune your observations.
- Ghostwriter
- Expatriate
- Posts: 3150
- Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2019 2:01 am
- Reputation: 2026
Re: Excellent decision against Alex Jones
[Admin edit: Enough already, you're banned.]
- Ghostwriter
- Expatriate
- Posts: 3150
- Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2019 2:01 am
- Reputation: 2026
- Big Daikon
- Expatriate
- Posts: 3189
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2019 8:07 am
- Reputation: 2605
Re: Excellent decision against Alex Jones
Not derailing, but comparing. In the case Snyder v. Phelps, the court ruled that the speech of WBC was political activism and therefore protected by the 1AM.Chad Sexington wrote: ↑Sat Aug 06, 2022 6:07 pm I’ve no dog in this fight, and I don’t want to derail the thread, but I always wondered how it is that Westboro Baptist Church could get away with protesting/picketing at the funerals of fallen military personnel, getting right in the faces of bereaved families, telling them they’re glad their loved ones died, and waving their “God hates Fags” etc’ banners.
How or why, have the WBC never been brought to task?
https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-re ... r-v-phelps
The Supreme Court's holding turned largely on its determination that the church was speaking on "matters of public concern" as opposed to "matters of purely private significance." The Court explained that "[s]peech deals with matters of public concern when it can 'be fairly considered as relating to any matter of political, social, or other concern to the community' or when it 'is a subject of general interest and of value and concern to the public.'" Speech on public issues is entitled to special protection under the First Amendment because it serves the "the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open."
With regards to the Jones cases, perhaps the legal argument was that the circumstances were different from the above and thus not protected speech.Even though some of the picket signs arguably targeted only the Snyder family, most of them addressed issues regarding the moral conduct of the U.S., the fate of the U.S., and homosexuality in the military. As such, the "overall thrust and dominant theme" of the speech related to broader public issues.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 32 Replies
- 3638 Views
-
Last post by phnompenhsteve
-
- 5 Replies
- 1457 Views
-
Last post by Alex
-
- 10 Replies
- 4355 Views
-
Last post by Doc67
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: crackheadyo, Semrush [Bot] and 528 guests