6 years ago I was working a part-time evening job and a bunch of the staff were all sitting doing our work at a table (manual manufacture all the shit was from China)

and some topic came up and I referred to the topic as THUGS, the entire table, mostly dumb-fucks and young retards ALL got so angry

thinking i was referring to black people. I told them they just assumed that THUGS meant black people due to rap music, NONE of them understood true language and all proceeded to hate on me big time. I was not even talking about any skin color or person, I was talking a bout a criminal I can see it in my mind it was so crazy. This was one of those places that forces rah rah rah we love our job cheer sessions as a group collective and if you did no fake it even a little, they made notes. Very THE CIRCLE on a smaller scale. All knew I am a believer in Christ and began to call me a bigot and all the rest. The point is the taking of words WAS a huge effort/push for dummies and young people as it is that important when nothing is TRUE any longer and words do not have real meaning you can rely on. Today 6 years later it must be even more brain-washy. Some of these same people could not read a face clock only digital and could not read cursive. I saw it coming.

Even the word FACT is debatable, here we are 2020.

snatch up old dictionaries and keep them and give to youkids and grandkids like gold

TAKE BACK WORDS starting with male/female, marriage, biological sex, etc.

all PB

>>10551329

>>10551423

>>10551425

>>10551447

>>10551463

>>10551447

>>10551463

>>10551434

>>10551503

>>10551707

>>10551738 I read entire post

agree

the TLDR people are part of the problem as well, even if on our side

all have been conditoned to only take small bites and fast or no thanks

here is one such moran: >>10551760 trying to get others to not read your post

I say your post is

NOTABLE

as it is TRUE

>>10551738

>>10551939

you and I like WORDS as they matter

great post and again TRUE

all of it

and I would stand in any room and say as much even of no one stood with me

I do it all the time

I am a thumb in a world full of fingers

I love TRUTH

will not accept anything false even if standing alone

>>10551738

Notable

just because anons post is all TRUE WORDS

replying to: >>10551707

>>10551738

>>10551707

Supreme Court unanimously reaffirms: There is no ‘hate speech’ exception to the First Amendment

June 19, 2017

From today’s opinion by Justice Samuel Alito (for four justices) in Matal v. Tam, the “Slants” case:

[The idea that the government may restrict] speech expressing ideas that offend … strikes at the heart of the First Amendment. Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express “the thought that we hate.”

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote separately, also for four justices, but on this point the opinions agreed:

A law found to discriminate based on viewpoint is an “egregious form of content discrimination,” which is “presumptively unconstitutional.” … A law that can be directed against speech found offensive to some portion of the public can be turned against minority and dissenting views to the detriment of all. The First Amendment does not entrust that power to the government’s benevolence. Instead, our reliance must be on the substantial safeguards of free and open discussion in a democratic society.

And the justices made clear that speech that some view as racially offensive is protected not just against outright prohibition but also against lesser restrictions.

In Matal, the government refused to register “The Slants” as a band’s trademark, on the ground that the name might be seen as demeaning to Asian Americans. The government wasn’t trying to forbid the band from using the mark; it was just denying it certain protections that trademarks get against unauthorized use by third parties.

But even in this sort of program, the court held, viewpoint discrimination — including against allegedly racially offensive viewpoints — is unconstitutional.

And this no-viewpoint-discrimination principle has long been seen as applying to exclusion of speakers from universities, denial of tax exemptions to nonprofits, and much more.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/06/19/supreme-court-unanimously-reaffirms-there-is-no-hate-speech-exception-to-the-first-amendment/

(Justice Neil Gorsuch wasn’t on the court when the case was argued, so only eight justices participated.)

>>10552043

I hate that the author put in brackets part of sentence inside brackets [ ] we know what that means (killbox)

[The idea that the government may restrict] speech expressing ideas that offend

(The author surely does not know about the killbox ? )