Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are so far off. Should I be allowed to punch you in face for your vote? It's not that they are embarrassed for their vote, it's just that the whole thing of your vote being none of anyone's dang business, is what is wrong here. They shouldn't be attack for it, just like you shouldn't be attacked for yours...
You shouldn't be allowed to punch anyone in the face because it's against the law, regardless of your motives for doing so.
Plus, we're not talking about people's VOTES.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PureNarcotic
As far as I can tell, this ruling doesn't allow to anyone punch anyone if the face.
Exactly. But leave it to the haters to allege it does.
Really, I thought it was reinforcing it. I didn't see where it said people can't sign petitions anymore I just saw where we can now make it public. Am I missing something?
The argument is that when you make petitions public, it is a first amendment violation.
I'm guessing because someone fears a large backlash from the gay/lesbian community.
However, as long as that backlash isn't physical, then thats the first amendment right of the people protesting as well, is it not?
If it is physical, then its a matter for the police.
Free speech doesn't mean anonymous speech, now does it?
Freedom of speech means that you have the right to speak about whatever you want, in a public or private situation. It means that you are free of repercussions from the law for your statements.
That means that the law will protect your physical being.
However, that doesn't mean they protect your business from being protested, if you are against a popular measure. That doesn't protect your public persona.
I'd like to know,
What do you think these people are worried about? Large numbers of homosexuals protesting in front of their home?
Again, they aren't giving out addresses, just names.
Yes, it does. It's been ruled a few times. It protects anonymous political speech.
Your first sentence is quite a bold statement. Care to show any statistic that validates that?
Every protest held by leftists anywhere on the planet, and particularly in the US, has always resulted in violence. There has never yet been a single left-wing peaceful protest. Only the right-wing in the US are capable of having peaceful protests, in the tradition of true Americans.
So when the left-wing demand to see the names and addresses of those who signed a petition leftists disagree with, it can only be for one thing - violent retaliation and retribution.
Every protest held by leftists anywhere on the planet, and particularly in the US, has always resulted in violence. There has never yet been a single left-wing peaceful protest. Only the right-wing in the US are capable of having peaceful protests, in the tradition of true Americans.
So when the left-wing demand to see the names and addresses of those who signed a petition leftists disagree with, it can only be for one thing - violent retaliation and retribution.
LMAO This almost made me **** myself laughing. I think by statistics he actually meant REAL statistics like numbers, sources, links, etc. With that incredibly bold statement you just made shouldn't be too hard for you to back that up with facts eh?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
