Posted on Aug 31, 2024
New Scandal Embroils Harris Running Mate Gov. Tim Walz - USA Journal
316
16
19
3
3
0
Posted 3 mo ago
Responses: 3
Yes it is. I want educators who support a student, no matter how they identify
(3)
(0)
(0)
(0)
Maj John Bell
SrA John Monette
The No Religious Test Clause of the United States Constitution is a clause within Article VI, Clause 3: "Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
I want to live in aa society where free speech includes freedom from compelled speech. A biological female or biological male that is under the gender dysphoria delusion that they are not so, has no right to compel me to play along with their gender dysphoria delusion.
The No Religious Test Clause of the United States Constitution is a clause within Article VI, Clause 3: "Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
I want to live in aa society where free speech includes freedom from compelled speech. A biological female or biological male that is under the gender dysphoria delusion that they are not so, has no right to compel me to play along with their gender dysphoria delusion.
(0)
(0)
Once again right-wing rags like The Federalist are showing their obsession with sex, attacking any system or organization that supports letting people love and live as they see fit.
(2)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
MSG Stan Hutchison - Sure, they will be able to continue teaching - as long as they abandon their faith. Which is not really in compliance with the free exercise clause.
But then again, Walz is also on record saying that the first Amendment does not actually guarantee free speech, either. So it is not a surprise that he is willing to excise other parts of the 1st Amendment.
But then again, Walz is also on record saying that the first Amendment does not actually guarantee free speech, either. So it is not a surprise that he is willing to excise other parts of the 1st Amendment.
(0)
(0)
MSG Stan Hutchison
SFC Casey O'Mally - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
Does not guarantee free speech, just that Congress will make no law abridging free speech. Our courts have ruled there can be limits on speech, such as "no yelling fire in a crowded theater." That is why Rudy lost his case. That is why Trump has to pay out millions.
Does not guarantee free speech, just that Congress will make no law abridging free speech. Our courts have ruled there can be limits on speech, such as "no yelling fire in a crowded theater." That is why Rudy lost his case. That is why Trump has to pay out millions.
(0)
(0)
Maj John Bell
MSG Stan Hutchison - There are two issues at play here as I see it.
1) The No Religious Test Clause of the United States Constitution is a clause within Article VI, Clause 3: "Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
2)Freedom from compelled speech. See article below,
https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/compelled-speech/#:~:text=The%20compelled%20speech%20doctrine%20sets%20out%20that%20the,refusing%20to%20articulate%20or%20adhere%20to%20its%20messages.
1) The No Religious Test Clause of the United States Constitution is a clause within Article VI, Clause 3: "Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
2)Freedom from compelled speech. See article below,
https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/compelled-speech/#:~:text=The%20compelled%20speech%20doctrine%20sets%20out%20that%20the,refusing%20to%20articulate%20or%20adhere%20to%20its%20messages.
The Free Speech Center is the most-visited resource on the First Amendment freedoms, with free daily news reports and comprehensive First Amendment Encyclopedia.
(0)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
MSG Stan Hutchison Right. Speech that intentionally and predictably harms others can be criminalized BASED ON THE HARM. You actually CAN yell fire in a crowded theater if no one stampedes. Or if the theater is actually on fire. It is not the SPEECH that is criminalized, it is the causing of harm.
That is not what Walz said, though. He said there is no guarantee to free speech as it pertains to misinformation. According to Walz, it is perfectly OK for the government to censor people with whom they disagree. And that DEFINITELY violates the first Amendment.
Also, so tired of the "can't yell fire in a crowded theater" trope being trotted out every single time people want to censor or criminalize speech. Because it is always presented without proper context and used to justify prohibitions on radically different speech. Like you just did here.
That is not what Walz said, though. He said there is no guarantee to free speech as it pertains to misinformation. According to Walz, it is perfectly OK for the government to censor people with whom they disagree. And that DEFINITELY violates the first Amendment.
Also, so tired of the "can't yell fire in a crowded theater" trope being trotted out every single time people want to censor or criminalize speech. Because it is always presented without proper context and used to justify prohibitions on radically different speech. Like you just did here.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next