One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main
Pro-choice protesters burn American F**g in streets of Washington DC after Roe V Wade reversal..
Page 1 of 2 next>
Jun 25, 2022 00:06:05   #
proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA
 
https://www.foxnews.com/us/pro-choice-protesters-burn-american-f**g-streets-washington-dc-roe-v-wade-reversal

Reply
Jun 25, 2022 00:10:12   #
proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA
 
Supreme Court overturns Roe V Wade ..Live Updates

https://nypost.com/2022/06/24/live-updates-supreme-court-overturns-roe-v-wade/

https://mobile.twitter.com/shoton35mm/status/1540540280436232192/video/1

Reply
Jun 25, 2022 15:38:42   #
LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago
 
For years now, there have been Right to Life marches in D. C. And not once were there r**ts or burning f**gs or even much litter after they left. Mostly prayers and speeches and friendly camaraderie for the cause.

But these Right to K**l bastards burn our f**g, soon some cars will go if things are normal for those mental children, and of course litter everywhere. Shouts and screaming and not a logical thought from the lot.

Reply
 
 
Jun 25, 2022 15:53:04   #
AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State
 
LogicallyRight wrote:
For years now, there have been Right to Life marches in D. C. And not once were there r**ts or burning f**gs or even much litter after they left. Mostly prayers and speeches and friendly camaraderie for the cause.

But these Right to K**l bastards burn our f**g, soon some cars will go if things are normal for those mental children, and of course litter everywhere. Shouts and screaming and not a logical thought from the lot.


Not only screaming but screaming obscenities. What a classless group of organic material.

Reply
Jun 26, 2022 18:02:35   #
Peaver Bogart Loc: Montana
 
AuntiE wrote:
Not only screaming but screaming obscenities. What a classless group of organic material.


Years ago I thought it was illegal to burn an American F**g except to destroy a worn out one. WTH happened?

Reply
Jun 26, 2022 21:12:34   #
LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago
 
Peaver Bogart wrote:
Years ago I thought it was illegal to burn an American F**g except to destroy a worn out one. WTH happened?


Far left democrats

Reply
Jun 26, 2022 21:20:11   #
AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State
 
Peaver Bogart wrote:
Years ago I thought it was illegal to burn an American F**g except to destroy a worn out one. WTH happened?


SCOTUS decision.

On June 21, 1989, a deeply divided United States Supreme Court upheld the rights of protesters to burn the American f**g in a landmark First Amendment decision.


In the controversial Texas v. Johnson case, the Court v**ed 5-4 in favor of Gregory Lee Johnson, the protester who had burned the f**g. Johnson’s actions, the majority argued, were symbolic speech, political in nature, and could be expressed even at the expense of our national symbol and to the affront of those who disagreed with him.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing a concurrence, spelled out his reasoning succinctly.

“The hard fact is that sometimes we must make decisions we do not like. We make them because they are right, right in the sense that the law and the Constitution, as we see them, compel the result,” Kennedy said. “And so great is our commitment to the process that, except in the rare case, we do not pause to express distaste for the result, perhaps for fear of undermining a valued principle that dictates the decision. This is one of those rare cases.

Chief Justice William Rehnquist dissented, along with John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O’Connor, and Byron White. In his dissent, Rehnquist said that, “the f**g is not simply another ‘idea’ or ‘point of view’ competing for recognition in the marketplace of ideas.”

“I cannot agree that the First Amendment invalidates the Act of Congress, and the laws of 48 of the 50 States, which make criminal the public burning of the f**g,” he said.

Reply
 
 
Jun 26, 2022 21:28:46   #
proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA
 
AuntiE wrote:
SCOTUS decision.

On June 21, 1989, a deeply divided United States Supreme Court upheld the rights of protesters to burn the American f**g in a landmark First Amendment decision.


In the controversial Texas v. Johnson case, the Court v**ed 5-4 in favor of Gregory Lee Johnson, the protester who had burned the f**g. Johnson’s actions, the majority argued, were symbolic speech, political in nature, and could be expressed even at the expense of our national symbol and to the affront of those who disagreed with him.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing a concurrence, spelled out his reasoning succinctly.

“The hard fact is that sometimes we must make decisions we do not like. We make them because they are right, right in the sense that the law and the Constitution, as we see them, compel the result,” Kennedy said. “And so great is our commitment to the process that, except in the rare case, we do not pause to express distaste for the result, perhaps for fear of undermining a valued principle that dictates the decision. This is one of those rare cases.

Chief Justice William Rehnquist dissented, along with John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O’Connor, and Byron White. In his dissent, Rehnquist said that, “the f**g is not simply another ‘idea’ or ‘point of view’ competing for recognition in the marketplace of ideas.”

“I cannot agree that the First Amendment invalidates the Act of Congress, and the laws of 48 of the 50 States, which make criminal the public burning of the f**g,” he said.
SCOTUS decision. br br i On June 21, 1989, a de... (show quote)


It's a very bad decision to let American F**g burn...Anerican F**g is a symbol of Freedom, something that our brave men and women of military sacrificed their lives for...I wish people who burn American F**g would be punished for it..

Reply
Jun 26, 2022 21:30:42   #
AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State
 
proud republican wrote:
It's a very bad decision to let American F**g burn...Anerican F**g is a symbol of Freedom, something that our brave men and women sacrificed their lives for...I wish people who burn American F**g wod be punished for it..


I am absolutely unable to let this pass. There were no r**ts when that decision came out.

Reply
Jun 26, 2022 21:38:13   #
proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA
 
AuntiE wrote:
I am absolutely unable to let this pass. There were no r**ts when that decision came out.


So??

Reply
Jun 26, 2022 22:47:13   #
Peaver Bogart Loc: Montana
 
AuntiE wrote:
SCOTUS decision.

On June 21, 1989, a deeply divided United States Supreme Court upheld the rights of protesters to burn the American f**g in a landmark First Amendment decision.


In the controversial Texas v. Johnson case, the Court v**ed 5-4 in favor of Gregory Lee Johnson, the protester who had burned the f**g. Johnson’s actions, the majority argued, were symbolic speech, political in nature, and could be expressed even at the expense of our national symbol and to the affront of those who disagreed with him.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing a concurrence, spelled out his reasoning succinctly.

“The hard fact is that sometimes we must make decisions we do not like. We make them because they are right, right in the sense that the law and the Constitution, as we see them, compel the result,” Kennedy said. “And so great is our commitment to the process that, except in the rare case, we do not pause to express distaste for the result, perhaps for fear of undermining a valued principle that dictates the decision. This is one of those rare cases.

Chief Justice William Rehnquist dissented, along with John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O’Connor, and Byron White. In his dissent, Rehnquist said that, “the f**g is not simply another ‘idea’ or ‘point of view’ competing for recognition in the marketplace of ideas.”

“I cannot agree that the First Amendment invalidates the Act of Congress, and the laws of 48 of the 50 States, which make criminal the public burning of the f**g,” he said.
SCOTUS decision. br br i On June 21, 1989, a de... (show quote)


SCOTUS should overturn that one too. If I saw someone burning our f**g in protest, they wouldn't like what I would be about to do.

Reply
 
 
Jun 27, 2022 00:05:18   #
AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State
 
proud republican wrote:
So??


Humpf…you missed the idea. Such a decision would/is abhorrent to conservatives, yet they did not r**t.

Reply
Jun 27, 2022 00:07:57   #
AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State
 
Peaver Bogart wrote:
SCOTUS should overturn that one too. If I saw someone burning our f**g in protest, they wouldn't like what I would be about to do.


At the risk of raising your ire, no. It would take us down a very very sticky path. As, like you, it best not happen in front of me.

Reply
Jun 27, 2022 00:13:37   #
proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA
 
AuntiE wrote:
At the risk of raising your ire, no. It would take us down a very very sticky path. As, like you, it best not happen in front of me.


Just because it's legal, doesn't make it right...

Reply
Jun 27, 2022 00:16:14   #
AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State
 
proud republican wrote:
Just because it's legal, doesn't make it right...


I do not like believe the f**g should be burned. At the same time, since earlier posting about it, I went back and read a portion of it. Though disagreeing, I saw their reasoning.

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.