XPost: alt.slack.goathead, alt.slack, alt.checkmate   
   From: Kenito@Benito.naw   
      
   On Sat, 20 Sep 2025 05:59:12 -0500, sion F2  wrote:   
      
   >Tom Mix wrote:   
   >> In article <>, Doc Hammerslack <   
   ochammerslack@creon.earth> 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.   
      
        Sure. If you want to.   
      
   >Bah First   
   >Amendment who needs it.   
      
        Wow. You liberals sure do HATE freedom. Unless it runs afoul of   
   your leftist heroes.   
      
   >That's you conservatives.   
      
        They're not quite like that. And I seriously doubt that was Tom's   
   position.   
      
   --   
   Cholesterol has a special place in my heart.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)