Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. Become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

Supreme Court decision of the day


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, gotbeer said:

This could become interesting if it goes anywhere.  

Justice Thomas assails landmark U.S. libel ruling that protects media

this could put the weekly world news out of business, thus depriving me of the opportunity to read human interest stories while i'm in the checkout line at ralphs. i'm not sure i like where this is headed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Tank said:

this could put the weekly world news out of business, thus depriving me of the opportunity to read human interest stories while i'm in the checkout line at ralphs. i'm not sure i like where this is headed.

Well, don't worry. You could just log on to Angelswin (if it still exists) and not do anything due to your fear of being sued. You'll have plenty of time to do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RallyMo said:

@Taylor , when I saw this I got pretty fired up and was about to unleash a 18,000 word post on why this would be absolutely terrible. However, you've really hit the nail on the head with your post(s).

Thanks! I learned all this eight years ago in my Communications Law class (my degree is in journalism). It was by far the toughest class I took in college, but I probably retained more info from that class than any other. Our professor (his name was Michael Jordan) really emphasized the "actual malice" point of a libel suit until it was stuck in our brains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, gotbeer said:

I'm sure this will be on the Supreme Court docet in the future.  But hey, equal rights!

With women in combat roles, a federal court rules the male-only draft unconstitutional

This is something I’ve always wondered about. I’ve never met a woman so determined to achieve equality that she demanded the right to register for the draft 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

This is something I’ve always wondered about. I’ve never met a woman so determined to achieve equality that she demanded the right to register for the draft 

Equal rights has also screwed women out of free drinks at bars on ladies night.  And or mothers day presents at Angel games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jason said:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/25/scotus-reluctant-to-extend-1st-amendment-protections-to-facebook-twitter-users.html

Personally, I don't think people should have first amendment rights on privately owned  businesses.  When this ruling comes down though Twitter and Facebook will become even more insufferable. 

It sure sounds like they're not going to extend 1A rights to social media. That would be a TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE precedent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jason said:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/25/scotus-reluctant-to-extend-1st-amendment-protections-to-facebook-twitter-users.html

Personally, I don't think people should have first amendment rights on privately owned  businesses.  When this ruling comes down though Twitter and Facebook will become even more insufferable. 

Yep. It's the modern equivalent of yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, RallyMo said:

It sure sounds like they're not going to extend 1A rights to social media. That would be a TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE precedent.

As terrible as it sounds they are private companies. It's sort of the same argument as the gay wedding cake stuff. I think the big issue with Facebook and Twitter is the large amounts of information spread and people that use them. Silencing certain content could be disastrous for the country as a whole.  I can totally see your point and it is a valid one.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Jason said:

As terrible as it sounds they are private companies. It's sort of the same argument as the gay wedding cake stuff. I think the big issue with Facebook and Twitter is the large amounts of information spread and people that use them. Silencing certain content could be disastrous for the country as a whole.  I can totally see your point and it is a valid one.  

I think you misunderstand me or I am not communicating well. I do not believe that 1A rights should extend to Facebook/Twitter, at least not at this point in time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"the anti-vaccination movement originates and finds its strongest support in the political left. A later article by the same researchers similarly argues that Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) evidence shows that states that voted for Obama in 2012 have higher rates of nonmedical vaccination exemptions."

http://theconversation.com/anti-vaccination-beliefs-dont-follow-the-usual-political-polarization-81001

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...