Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Has Died

Innula Zenovka

Nasty Brit
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
8,629
SLU Posts
18459
Being in favor of free speech as defined in the U.S. Constitution (however one interprets that) and assuming that some nebulous "liberty" gives one the right to do whatever the hell they want are not exactly the same thing.
No, of course not. But when it comes to the extremes, Ken White regards it as dangerous governmental overreach to put people in prison for inciting hatred against people based on their racial or national origin, or sexual orientation, or religion, or a number of other protected categories, and I regard it as essential for a free society.
 
  • 1Agree
Reactions: Aribeth Zelin

Aribeth Zelin

Faeryfox
Joined
Sep 23, 2018
Messages
1,734
SL Rez
2004
Joined SLU
03-11-2011
SLU Posts
9410
No, of course not. But when it comes to the extremes, Ken White regards it as dangerous governmental overreach to put people in prison for inciting hatred against people based on their racial or national origin, or sexual orientation, or religion, or a number of other protected categories, and I regard it as essential for a free society.
For what its worth, I don't even think its a profound difference in US vs UK/Euro upbringing, but rather a case of people not grokking what exactly the first amendment was intended to do and not do, and a certain level of entitled ignorance/arrogance.

Then again, while my parents were both US citizens from birth, and even the schools I went to when my dad was stationed overseas were american run [I think?], I did spend most of those formative years watching European television, most likely primarily British since I think my German would be better if I'd watched enough German programming, and I more often will watch British television programs even now, and grew up reading more stuff from that side of the Atlantic than this one.

Or maybe its just that logically freedom of speech is supposed to protect whistleblowers and journalists for telling truth to power, and not allow you to cause a panic by yelling 'Fire' in a crowded building, [Unless there is one], or by telling people different than you that they aren't real people, aren't real americans, or even not allowed to marry and enjoy the same benefits as they have because it offends them.

And anyone who thinks that Freedom of Speech protects hate speech of any kind is an idiot. [Even if I do agree with them on other matters.]
 

Free

she/feline
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
13,651
Location
Underground in America
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565
No, of course not. But when it comes to the extremes, Ken White regards it as dangerous governmental overreach to put people in prison for inciting hatred against people based on their racial or national origin, or sexual orientation, or religion, or a number of other protected categories, and I regard it as essential for a free society.
The difference for me is, I will fight for Ken's right to disagree with me (and I assume most of us) over such an extreme interpretation of "Free Speech," whereas the "I can own slaves and fuck you up if I want to because "LIBERTY"" dudes can fuck right off.
 

Innula Zenovka

Nasty Brit
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
8,629
SLU Posts
18459
For what its worth, I don't even think its a profound difference in US vs UK/Euro upbringing, but rather a case of people not grokking what exactly the first amendment was intended to do and not do, and a certain level of entitled ignorance/arrogance.

Then again, while my parents were both US citizens from birth, and even the schools I went to when my dad was stationed overseas were american run [I think?], I did spend most of those formative years watching European television, most likely primarily British since I think my German would be better if I'd watched enough German programming, and I more often will watch British television programs even now, and grew up reading more stuff from that side of the Atlantic than this one.

Or maybe its just that logically freedom of speech is supposed to protect whistleblowers and journalists for telling truth to power, and not allow you to cause a panic by yelling 'Fire' in a crowded building, [Unless there is one], or by telling people different than you that they aren't real people, aren't real americans, or even not allowed to marry and enjoy the same benefits as they have because it offends them.

And anyone who thinks that Freedom of Speech protects hate speech of any kind is an idiot. [Even if I do agree with them on other matters.]
I dunno. British courts certainly hand down prison sentences to British racists and fascists who post certain types of material to US message boards, even though the content remains on the message board because it's protected by the First Amendment.
 

Innula Zenovka

Nasty Brit
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
8,629
SLU Posts
18459
The difference for me is, I will fight for Ken's right to disagree with me (and I assume most of us) over such an extreme interpretation of "Free Speech," whereas the "I can own slaves and fuck you up if I want to because "LIBERTY"" dudes can fuck right off.
Certainly, but my point is that there's always a conflict between my liberty to do something, and your freedom peacefully to go about your lawful business unmolested.

Slavery is obviously an extreme example, but the rights of enslavers not to have their liberty infringed, despite the harm it did to their victims, was a huge part of American political and legal thought, and I think that bias in favour of the individual's liberty as the expense of others is still very much there in US legal and politico-legal thinking.

Almost every time some right-wing US group takes up an issue under the Bill of Rights or subsequent constitutional amendments, before too long some right-wing British group tries something similar in our courts, quoting an equivalent provision under the ECHR.

Despite the fact the cases usually make their way to the US Supreme Court, the equivalent cases over here hardly ever get anywhere, and when they do, our Supreme Court generally finds against the right-wing provocateur, even though, on the face of it, the Bill of Rights and the ECHR protect pretty much the same things in most cases.

That's because, I think, there's a whole strand of protection for people's rights to go about their normal business in peace and unmolested by others that's very important in our legal tradition but doesn't seem to exist in the US -- for example, our courts recognise the right of women to attend abortion clinics, and staff to work there, free from harassment and intimidation as outweighing the right of protestors to freedom of assembly and speech, to the extent that local councils can create large no-go zones around clinics if necessary (subject always to judicial oversight) where such protests are prohibited.

That, as I understand it, just wouldn't be possible in the US, even if a local council had the political will to do it.
 

Kara Spengler

Queer OccupyE9 Sluni-Goon
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
5,847
Location
SL: November RL: DC
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
December, 2008
SLU Posts
23289
Voting has in fact already started in some states, both in-person early voting and mail-in/absentee. My absentee ballot is supposed to be mailed to me today, and when it arrives, I can fill it out and drop in the official drop box at my local library the same day.
Yeah, we voted the other day.
 
  • 1Yay!
Reactions: Soen Eber

Free

she/feline
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
13,651
Location
Underground in America
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565
Romney is not a "good guy." He's just too lazy to adhere to being a complete Trump maniac all the time. Kissing Trump's ass is a 24/7 job, and that can get tiring.
 
  • 1Agree
Reactions: Ryanna Enfield

Roxanne Blue

Una Mujer Fantastica
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
345
Location
Edge of the Earth
SL Rez
2009
Joined SLU
June 2009
SLU Posts
6577
I lost track, which of the Collins Romney Murkowski triad gets to be the good guy this time?

Likely Collins, but hopefully, it won't matter. Collins is slightly behind the challenger, Gideon and this will motivate women to turn out even more. Maine Republicans (especially women) have been quietly pro-choice for decades; the national party just as quietly looked the other way for GOP women's votes. No more. Collins will pay a price - deservedly - for her betrayal.
 

Jolene Benoir

Hello World
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
1,759
Location
Minnesnowta
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
Dec 2010

Free

she/feline
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
13,651
Location
Underground in America
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565
In a letter released Friday, 30 scholars threw their support behind a term-limit bill that was introduced last month by Democratic Reps. Ro Khanna of California, Don Beyer of Virginia and Joe Kennedy III of Massachusetts.

The legislation would set up 18-year terms for Supreme Court justices. To avoid clashing with the Constitution’s grant of life tenure to federal judges, justices would be given the option to continue serving on lower federal courts after their Supreme Court term expired.