so when cain went to the land of nod to build the city and then fathered the line of enoch, where the fuck did his wife come from? did she materialize out of thin air just to make the fairy tale more complete?
>>19926533 ah, found it
>>19926554 well, according to the lore, her name was Awan(hmm) and she was actually the first natural born human as well as being cain's twin sister lmao
that's some fucked up folk lore
so she was enoch's mother and aunt
resident anti-white people, jew lover who never leaves is here too
the ahtoadasos keep coming in
impeding traffic and disrupting the public is not peaceably assembling so arrest them
this is my surprise face
way too cold for that
secluded acreage in a constitutional focused red state like tn is preferable
no way could i do a cookie cutter home and hoa
>fire in a theater
just one more thing they've twisted to abridge free speech
give an inch and they take a mile
fairweather faggotry, i spit on
However, Alito is simply wrong that "shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater" is unprotected speech. The erroneous idea comes from the 1919 case Schenk v. United States. The case concerned whether distributing anti-draft pamphlets could lead to a conviction under the Espionage Act—and had nothing to do with fires or theaters.
In his opinion, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote that "the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic." However, this idea was introduced as an analogy, meant to illustrate that, as Trevor Timm wrote in The Atlantic in 2012, "the First Amendment is not absolute. It is what lawyers call dictum, a justice's ancillary opinion that doesn't directly involve the facts of the case and has no binding authority." The phrase, though an oft-repeated axiom in debates about the First Amendment, is simply not the law of the land now, nor has it ever been—something made all the more apparent when Schenk v. United States was largely overturned in 1969 by Brandenburg v. Ohio.
"Anyone who says 'you can't shout fire! in a crowded theatre' is showing that they don't know much about the principles of free speech, or free speech law—or history," Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression President Greg Lukianoff wrote in 2021. "This old canard, a favorite reference of censorship apologists, needs to be retired. It's repeatedly and inappropriately used to justify speech limitations."
While Alito's mistake is a common one, it is particularly frustrating because, as a Supreme Court Justice, he should know better. The popularity of this myth poses real threats to free speech. "You can't yell 'fire' in a crowded theatre," is often invoked to justify unconstitutional restrictions on speech and to overstate restrictions to the First Amendment. When this myth is adopted by a Supreme Court Justice—no less, the lone dissenter in two recent 8–1 First Amendment cases—it spells danger for our broader cultural understanding of free speech, as well as the values held by those in power.
https://reason.com/2022/10/27/yes-you-can-yell-fire-in-a-crowded-theater/
oooooh veiled threats
you so scary
everyone now wants to suck your dick because you're such a badass pussy pulling machine
>federal agent wants anon to dox self
i mean i knew you guys were stupid and all that but holy shit