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

[ultramanhyata]

Bro, put a cross next to that star of David and I am down with this new flag. It speaks proudly to America's strong Judeo-Christian foundations!

 

[Sous-la-pluie]

loling

 

[Ophydian]

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?

I’d be more for this bill if it meant any country not on a sanctioned list cannot be boycott if you want to do business with the US. Why give Israel more importance than Colombia for instance?

 

[ShinkanPo]

I love threads that start with how anyone that disagrees should be beaten with a hose.

And Spectacular Moron..

 

[Trotsky]

You couldn't respond to his cogent, well-reasoned counter argument with facts and logic so you resorted to meme'ing. Sad!

I started to, because this is an area I like and have studied, but the more I looked at the post the less sense it made.

 

[Andy Capp]

I've been delayed, but before long, I expect to submit a post for the president's sticky thread talking about the prevailing currents of the discussion surrounding Israel. This situation with Rubio is an extension of a decision to treat criticism of Israel as anti-Semitism. It has been promulgated by the Israeli government and it has been widely accepted throughout the legislative branch of the US government. Ironically, that's a politically driven doctrine that tries to sidestep the individual responsibility of members of the Israeli government who are the decision makers, and who are doing so for solely political reasons, as far as I can tell.*


*

Spoiler

That last part forms the basis for opening the discussion in the aforementioned sticky. Why should the government be able to hide behind "If you criticize us for anything it's because you hate Jews"? And, are the criticisms of them I've seen solid facts or are they exaggerated for partisan reasons? Anyway, if there's one lesson Donald Trump has taught us, it is surely that criticizing one person for actions you disagree with is not the same thing as hating the whole country or its people, regardless of how serious the issue is, IMO.

 

[Andy Capp]

Oh yeah, to boot I can't believe there is a single American with a pulse that doesn't consider this a huge issue of free speech.

 

[ShadowRun]

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?

It was a reply to someone else whom brought up a baker.

 

[Greoric]

Amazing. Look at all the anti-racists being anti-Semites on here.

 

[Andy Capp]

Amazing. Look at all the anti-racists being anti-Semites on here.

Explain.

Or, to use language you understand,

Not an argument.

 

[tonni]

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 ?

What if the peope baker he cake but the gay cake doesn’t have a contrat is there’re a issue with the baker?

 

[hillelslovak87]

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?

This is the state curtailing speech......

 

[44nutman]

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?

That is fine for a private business but the government should not be telling the people who to boycott or not.
Thomas Jefferson is spinning in his fucking grave.

 

[HockeyBjj]

It was a reply to someone else whom brought up a baker.

That was me that brought up the baker to provide an analogy for Farmer Brown to better understand. Your response to me was well off the mark and very confusingly worded.

Serious question, are you high?

 

[Andy Capp]

It was a reply to someone else whom brought up a baker.

*who


LOL

 

[Darkballs]

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?

Because the actor here disassociating her is the State. Per the Constitution, the State cannot discriminate based on political speech, which SCOTUS has long held applies to boycotts.

 

[abiG]

"Opposition to our bill isn't about free speech," Rubio...

A good rule in politics: If you have to say a proposed law isn't about free speech, it's probably about free speech....
https://theweek.com/articles/816832/marco-rubios-israel-antiboycott-law-attack-free-speech

 

[Andy Capp]

"Opposition to our bill isn't about free speech," Rubio...

A good rule in politics: If you have to say a proposed law isn't about free speech, it's probably about free speech....
https://theweek.com/articles/816832/marco-rubios-israel-antiboycott-law-attack-free-speech

Your best post this year.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Amazing. Look at all the anti-racists being anti-Semites on here.

 

[Andy Capp]

Amazing. Look at all the anti-racists being anti-Semites on here.

Still waiting for you to provide some justification for this, shall we say poorly thought out, claim.