Law Spectacular moron Marco Rubio defends anti-1st Amendment BDS bill, says it's not about 1st Amendment

Discussion in 'The War Room' started by Trotsky, Jan 11, 2019.

  1. Trotsky

    Trotsky Silver Belt

    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    Messages:
    14,890
    Likes Received:
    35,761
    Anyone who really claims to think that Democrats are a remotely comparable threat to the First Amendment that Republicans are needs to be beaten with a hose. But I wouldn't support a law requiring that they are. Because First Amendment.

    "Opposition to our bill isn't about free speech," Rubio tweeted Tuesday."Companies are FREE to boycott Israel. But local & state governments should be FREE to end contracts with companies that do."

    The courts, at least, seem to disagree with Rubio. Federal courts have blocked anti-BDS laws in Arizona and Kansas, the latter of which required any individuals and companies that contract with the state to certify they are "not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel." Those rulings followed a long legal history: The Supreme Court ruled in the 1990s that local governments can't fire contractors for protected political speech.

    That's a good thing. Boycotts, after all, are a long-established political tool, both in the United States and abroad. Perhaps most famously, Martin Luther King Jr. led a boycott in Montgomery, Alabama to protest the racist policies of the bus service in that city after Rosa Parks refused to give her seat to a white passenger. In just the last few years, conservatives have boycotted Nike — even burning their shoes in protest — in response to an ad that featured Colin Kaepernick, the quarterback known for his protest against police brutality, while liberals have mounted boycott campaigns against companies that do business with the NRA or advertise on Fox News shows. There are even boycotts against Chik-fil-A.

    Why should Israel be off limits?

    The country, after all, has thrived in its modern incarnation for more than 70 years located in a pretty hostile Middle Eastern neighborhood. It has nuclear arms and is the recipient of billions of dollars in U.S. military aid. It seems resilient enough to survive a decision by a few Americans to spend their dollars elsewhere.

    You don't have to weigh the merits of Israeli policy, though, to think Rubio's bill is bad. The ACLU, for example, is fighting against anti-BDS laws but hasn't taken a position for or against these boycotts themselves. The argument isn't about whether such boycotts are good, wise, or just. It's about whether state, local, and federal governments in the United States should be able to punish people — like an attorney who provides legal services for poor defendants, or a teacher who helps other teachers get ready for the classroom — for making the political decision to boycott something.

    "Public officials cannot use the power of public office to punish views they don't agree with," the ACLU said in a blog post. "That's the kind of authoritarian power our Constitution is meant to protect against."

    That's exactly right. Certainly, Rubio isn't against boycotts per se: The bill, he explained in a tweet this week, "allows local & state govt's to boycott the boycotters by ending contracts with companies that give in to these Anti-Israel demands." He wants to punish Americans not for doing the wrong thing, but for thinking the wrong thoughts.


    At some point, the ongoing government shutdown will end. It's possible that opposition to Rubio's anti-boycott bill will subside as a result — Democrats filibustered the bill this week in part because they were blocking any Senate action until the standoff is over. But I would argue the controversy over the boycott movement is likely to get louder: The Birmingham Civil Rights Institute just rescinded an award to lefty icon Angela Davis because she supports boycotting Israel.

    In coming months, then, it seems likely the movement will spark discussions and arguments among neighbors, in churches, and across any number of American communities. It's up to individuals to decide how and if they'll act — Rubio and the U.S. government shouldn't get to decide for them in advance.

    https://theweek.com/articles/816832/marco-rubios-israel-antiboycott-law-attack-free-speech
     
  2. tonni

    tonni Red Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2017
    Messages:
    9,243
    Likes Received:
    19,984
    Location:
    Belgium
    I love threads that start with how anyone that disagrees should be beaten with a hose.
     
    Sketch, Scrody, grizzard2bid and 10 others like this.
  3. MMAisGod

    MMAisGod Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2009
    Messages:
    2,502
    Likes Received:
    1,586
    Location:
    Tampa Bay, Florida
    In this case, he's right. If anything the punishment suggested for disagreement is too light.
     
    Rum, Hunter Simpson and tonni like this.
  4. JDragon

    JDragon DOX News Anchor

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Messages:
    10,798
    Likes Received:
    11,523
    Location:
    Germany
    Let me start with I agree with the premise of the article and OP.

    There are two parts in the article that I personally disagree with, however:

    1) "Why should Israel be off limits?"
    2) "Most famously, MLK boycotted the bus service ..."

    Don't know about you guys, but the most well-known boycot to me is this one...

    [​IMG]
     
  5. xcvbn

    xcvbn Silver Belt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2006
    Messages:
    12,719
    Likes Received:
    9,374
    There's a bipartisan effort at play here. Democrat Ben Cardin is leading the way in the House.
     
  6. Trotsky

    Trotsky Silver Belt

    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    Messages:
    14,890
    Likes Received:
    35,761
    It's bipartisan, but it's disproportionately comprised of Republicans, who have also been more resistant to being pressured off of support. I think Schumer is the only major Democrat that has actually gone to bat for this nonsense.
     
  7. Happy Man

    Happy Man Green Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,305
    Likes Received:
    2,341
    Isreal will not be off limits due to the actions of the few and the dead.

    Isreal will pay for its heinous policies by those that are free to disagree with isreal.
     
  8. Happy Man

    Happy Man Green Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,305
    Likes Received:
    2,341
    Why do you think schumer is for this fascism?

    :rolleyes:
     
  9. Farmer Br0wn

    Farmer Br0wn Farmer Br0wn belt

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2013
    Messages:
    5,541
    Likes Received:
    6,319
    Location:
    Earth
    Freedom of association also implies the freedom to disassociate.

    We often hear that freedom of speech should not entail freedom from consequences. Why would this situation be any different?
     
    ShadowRun likes this.
  10. xcvbn

    xcvbn Silver Belt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2006
    Messages:
    12,719
    Likes Received:
    9,374
    Leader Schumer counts as a lot of Dems tho and while others may not be enthusiastic about it, they will be pressured by leadership to fall in line and to not challenge the provision. Then there's the ones who have no idea it's being slipped into every proposed budget bill.


    This is why voters like me are hysterical and running around screaming about people like Schumer and Pelosi maintaining leadership roles. Yes, they have massive experience, but that comes with a cost: they know all the ins and outs to more effectively curtail the progress Americans seek.
     
  11. HockeyBjj

    HockeyBjj Putting on the foil

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2012
    Messages:
    9,951
    Likes Received:
    14,395
    Because the government should not be free to disassociate based on who you are freely associating or dissasociating with dumbass.

    If a private business wants to no longer do biz with another business because they are boycotting Israel that'd be just fine. Government should not

    Do you want the government to pull the Colorado baker's business liscense because he won't associate with a lgbt group they demand?
     
    LuchaBear, SSOTO, milliniar and 15 others like this.
  12. Rod1

    Rod1 Titanium Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    44,560
    Likes Received:
    29,581
    Location:
    Sonora, Mexico.
    Because its government.
     
    lts5025, Sohei, Kafir-kun and 6 others like this.
  13. Trotsky

    Trotsky Silver Belt

    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    Messages:
    14,890
    Likes Received:
    35,761
    Because it's a government action. The United States government does not itself have freedom of speech or the freedom to punish people for their speech by revoking or refusing public contracts based on politics. I suspect that you'd feel differently if we made it a law that everyone who supports Trump (an objectively less defensible position than criticizing Israeli occupation) can have their businesses boycotted by the government/the biggest provider of contracts in the country.
     
    LuchaBear, Kafir-kun, Higus and 3 others like this.
  14. BKMMAFAN

    BKMMAFAN Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2006
    Messages:
    10,487
    Likes Received:
    3,439
    The Government can't punish speech based on viewpoint. This seems to be a viewpoint-based case of discrimination. Courts typically consider this the most egregious type of speech regulation.
     
    Kafir-kun, Happy Man, Higus and 3 others like this.
  15. VivaRevolution

    VivaRevolution Whoopin' Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2016
    Messages:
    23,267
    Likes Received:
    25,129
  16. ShadowRun

    ShadowRun error Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7,923
    Likes Received:
    3,673
    If they were contracted by the state to make cakes for state events and the baker said no because there’re might be gay peope there. So the state doesn’t want his business but he’s free to keep his business open, don’t see a problem ?
     
  17. Trotsky

    Trotsky Silver Belt

    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    Messages:
    14,890
    Likes Received:
    35,761
    [​IMG]
     
  18. Cubo de Sangre

    Cubo de Sangre President of the War Room

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2014
    Messages:
    36,021
    Likes Received:
    36,735
    Location:
    Hell
    Didn't know Rubio was so anti-American. Fuck that guy.
     
    Kafir-kun, Stoic1 and Hunter Simpson like this.
  19. PolishHeadlock

    PolishHeadlock Putin Belt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    41,659
    Likes Received:
    36,249
    Location:
    Phila fucking delphia
    <Huh2>
    The constitution protects the government from the people lol
     
    Trotsky and Kafir-kun like this.
  20. HockeyBjj

    HockeyBjj Putting on the foil

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2012
    Messages:
    9,951
    Likes Received:
    14,395
    [​IMG]

    I'm so lost. Nothing about your prompt involved the government blacklisting a company because they support or don't support a certain cause. Your prompt sounds like the baker declining a job for a state event?
     
    Higus likes this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.