XPost: alt.slack.goathead, alt.slack, alt.checkmate   
   From: sionf2@drum.cc   
      
   Tom Mix wrote:   
   > In article <>, sion F2    
   wrote:   
   >   
   >> Tom Mix wrote:   
   >>> In article <>, Doc Hammerslack   
   >>>  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> NOTICE: The DOCTOR is ON...at Sat, 20 Sep 2025 03:01:52 -0500, Kenito   
   >>>> Benito wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>> On Fri, 19 Sep 2025 13:38:08 -0400, mixed nuts   
   >>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>> On 9/19/2025 11:49, Janithor wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 9/19/2025 2:51 AM, William Stickers wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> Janithor wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> [...]   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Who is next?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Not me. I live in a country where people don't shoot each other   
   >>>>>>>> every   
   >>>>>>>> day because we don't have a fucking stoopid second amendment.   
   >>>>>>>> Charlie Kirk said that of the gun deaths, "I think it's worth it. I   
   >>>>>>>> think it's worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths   
   >>>>>>>> every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to   
   >>>>>>>> protect   
   >>>>>>>> our other God-given rights."   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> So suck it up.   
   >>>>>>>> Charlie has.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Whining about it won't bring him back or the other Americans shot by   
   >>>>>>>> other gun bearing Americans exercising their "God-given rights.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> You didn't read the link, did you? Kinda helps when you're   
   >>>>>>> formulating   
   >>>>>>> a reply.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Not everybody needs (or deserves) free speech.  Free speech is for   
   >>>>>> important people (like dead Charlie, Donald J. Trump).  It's not for   
   >>>>>> unimportant people like Jimmy Kimmel or people on MSNBC or CNN.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>        What, exactly, do you think the government, or its agent(s), did   
   >>>>> to Jimmy to violate his First Amendment Right?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>> The FCC chair threatened ABC affiliates with taking their broadcast   
   >>>> licenses away for (checks notes) "lying".  That is very much a first   
   >>>> amendment issue.   
   >>>>   
   >>> True, the government should not be involved.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> It's the new "Kimmel rule" in the Glorious Trump   
   >>>> State version of Calvinball.   
   >>>>   
   >>> Did you care this much when the same game was played against   
   >>> conservatives?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Looks like it's time for another donation to the ACLU:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>> https://aclu.org   
   >>>>   
   >>> The same ones who support paedophiles? You're aligning with them?   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> BTW, another first amendment organization isn't as famous,   
   >>>> but is important anyway -- and that is "Americans United for   
   >>>> the Separation of Church and State":   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>> https://au.org   
   >>>>   
   >>> AU is less about "separation" and more about selective enforcement.   
   >>> They never raise hell when left-leaning groups drag politics into the   
   >>> pulpit, but the second a conservative church speaks up, they're on the   
   >>> attack. That's not protecting the First Amendment, that's weaponizing   
   >>> it. If they actually cared about neutrality, they'd apply the same   
   >>> standard across the board — but they don't.   
   >>>>   
   >> Stand up and raise the flags to the Second Amendment.  Bah First   
   >> Amendment who needs it.  That's you conservatives.   
   >   
   > Pointing out AU’s bias isn’t rejecting the First Amendment,    
   it’s   
   > defending it. Go play your video games, boy.   
   >   
      
      
   You lost me with AU’s bias   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)