As a city we respect free speech but also have a duty to call out speech that does not reflect our city and its values,"

"As a city we respect free speech but also have a duty to call out speech that does not reflect our city and its values," Lyster added.

So I guess the people of the America First Rally were not part of the city?

The city has one official stated set of values?

If other cities start banning all rallies, activities and speech not supportive of Trump or Election Fraud, that is OK, too?

And it would be splendid if an entire state simply bans all progressive candidates and topics?

No, I think that city just violated this organizations right to free expression on some (sorry) trumped up half reason of an excuse and need to be sued.
 
No loss. It was probably a bunch of racist inbreds anyway. America First is a code word for white people first.
The way you blacks are killing each other off and aborting your babies, soon only family will be left for you to fuck. Maybe that is already happing with you, because you sure do seem to be a chromosome short...

1626654938049.png
 
"As a city we respect free speech but also have a duty to call out speech that does not reflect our city and its values," Lyster added.
I guess the Constitutionally guaranteed right to free speech is not one of your values.

That makes Michal Lyster and the people he fronts for fascists and no better than the CCP.
 
"Call out"? In political terms "call out" can mean anything from mild criticism to government sanctions at the point of a gun. Which is it?
 
for some reason people today have this weird idea that Free Speech means not being called out when you say or do something that is morally wrong.

I have heard members of white supremacist movements literally say that violates their free speech to be called racist. . They have it in their head that Free Speech means freedom from consequence. they think that it means they should be completely free to say and do whatever they want without any consequences at all.

Freedom of speech means the government cannot punish you for expressing an idea or belief. that is it .

but people still have the right to judge you based on your ideas and your beliefs


it doesn't violate your free speech for someone to judge you as a racist or a bigot if you express ideas and beliefs that are racist or bigoted
Who doesn't agree with this, but when the shoe is on the other foot, well it's the same bullcrap just in a different striped or colored shoe. Bottom line is when a person yells fire in a public square/theater, and it causes a stampede, then that person should be dealt with for their fraudulent actions.

However, only that person should be punished if caught red handed yelling fire when there was only one doing the yelling. Otherwise no one else in association with that person should be grouped in without knowing exactly their role in the situation totally.

Just because another person(s) is there, doesn't mean they would advocate or participate in the act of yelling fire, and on many occasions they actually couldn't believe it when their friend or associate yelled out fire when he or she did do it.

Free speech should be mainly to express freedom of ideas, opinions, and to state the obvious when it raises it's ugly or beautiful head.

Lie's should never fall under the category of free speech, nor should it give the right to be racist to someone or to be hate filled towards someone, and to be evil within the usage of that free speech.

Everything comes with consequences be it good or bad, and I mean everything.
 
"As a city we respect free speech but also have a duty to call out speech that does not reflect our city and its values," Lyster added.

The event had previously been scheduled -- and later canceled -- at two other venues, in Orange and Riverside counties.
Talk about hypocrisy... IN ONE SENTENCE!!!

And you people call people like me Nazis????
R.484eab28c70dbe86015f49af9accb288.gif
 
All elected politicians take an oath to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution. There is no such "duty" to call out people who engage in their 1st Amendment Constitutional rights. We kicked the Brits out for the same thing 250 years ago.
 
Wrong.

This is an example of content-neutral regulation of speech which is perfectly Constitutional and in no manner violates the First Amendment:

‘Content-neutral speech restrictions are restrictions that “are justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech….” - Virginia Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc., 425 U.S. 748, 771 (1976).’

Word-play and semantics.
Nobody was screaming "bomb" on an airplane at the America First Rally...Further, our framers added no caveat to the 1st.
 

Forum List

Back
Top