SmarterthanYou
rebel
why not? doesn't the 1st amendment restrict the government from infringing on it and not allowing it to set limits on what we can say and where, or how?
Read much? I said: Any license plate design should be disallowed because allowing some to express ideas in that way opens the road to groups you may find offensive doing the same. The government can either allow all groups to do it, or it should simply not allow any. It cannot discriminate based on what \(())/ thinks is hate.
There are both limits on what you can say and how.
Freespeech in its purest form allows you to say anything you choose, I dont think it allows you to do it in any way you chose. Draft dodgers were not allowed to burn draft cards and you are not allowed to scream fire in a crowded building (unless there is a fire).
SmarterthanYou
rebel
speech that incites or causes harm to others might indeed be limited, however, you use two of the worst examples i've seen. The fire in a crowded theater excuse has been widely tortured to the point that you let it excuse limiting speech you don't agree with and how is burning a draft card not an expression of the 1st Amendment when the draft is constitutionally invalid despite the wrongness of the SCOTUS decision?
According to the S. Ct. the draft is permissable AND burning draft cards can be made illegal because doing so substantually interfeared with the nations ability to defend/secure itself. Remember this was before computers so the card was more relevant.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
and the supreme court is wrong. again.
they made a law 'legal' to prosecute, not constitutional. they are wrong.
G
Guns Guns Guns
Guest
Thanks for making your position clear. Nobody should have the freedom to put any message on a license plate. Got it.
Your position is to remain deliberately obtuse. Got it. There is no right to use government to propound individual speech, but when it is afforded the government cannot pick and choose what speech to allow. These groups have a right to exist because of the First, if the government is going to allow special plates for any groups it must allow any legal group to have their equal say. It is the best policy when faced with that to simply so "no" to special plates rather than try to control speech through government entities.
If you want your car to say something about you, get a bumper sticker. If you want special plates, then you will have to allow any legal entity to have their special plate.
You must not understand the First. The government has no right to tell any legal entity that they cannot be on a government plate if they allow such special plates. The limitation is on the government, not on the individual.
The state cannot say that your church or group has any special privilege to be on the plates while disallowing a different church or group.
G
Guns Guns Guns
Guest
Is that like threatening to undelete one poster's deleted posts without undeleting other people's?
The Texas division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans has filed a lawsuit in federal court arguing that the Department of Motor Vehicles infringed on its free speech rights by refusing to issue a specialty license plate featuring a Confederate flag, the Los Angeles Times reports.
The Columbia, Tenn.-based group, with 30,000 members, released a statement last week announcing the suit, which was filed in U.S. District Court in Austin.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/12/1...confederate-flag-license-plate/#ixzz1gH56iGBP
hate speech is protected but hate actions against people are not
in other words, 'what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander'
if you allow one group, you have to allow all groups
No. It is entirely unlike that. This site is not run by the government.
