Biden DOJ Sides with Porn Industry's Lawsuit Against Texas's Age Verification Law

[hadit]

I imagine they would be ushered from in front of the door just like anyone else would.

IOW, the police would not be acting illegally in restricting their 1st Amendment rights, which is my point. They are on public property and they are expressing political speech yet can legally be prevented from doing so. Thank you.

But that you have to go to these extreme cases where it's not even in question simply means your hair is on fire.

I am making my point glaringly obvious by going to the extreme. If we accept the infringement of the 1st Amendment for the KKK because we do not want their poison to reach children, we can understand why others would not mind an infringement on the rights of others who want to consume pron in order to protect children from that poison. I have seen you argue against such efforts because you deem them useless. Fine, let's take the next step and make them more effective. We have to find a balance between freedom for adults and protection for children.

 

[hadit]

That doesn't have anything to do with them being KKK members and with them not having any business with the school. They'll turn away anyone who doesn't have business at the school. If a KKK member was a parent of a child going to that school then they couldn't be denied access. Bigots get to have their kids attend public schools too.

They don't get to exercise their 1st Amendment rights on school property is the point. Show up at a school's front door and start yelling. You will be removed, no matter what you're yelling. We value protecting the children from the disruption more than the person's 1st Amendment rights.

 

[Curried Goats]

They don't get to exercise their 1st Amendment rights on school property is the point. Show up at a school's front door and start yelling. You will be removed, no matter what you're yelling. We value protecting the children from the disruption more than the person's 1st Amendment rights.

That isn't unique to KKK members is my point as you're trying to pretend.

 

[hadit]

That isn't unique to KKK members is my point as you're trying to pretend.

Nope, just using them as an example of a group that is detested. Pron merchants who don't mind their product being consumed by children as also detested, though apparently not quite as much.

 

[Curried Goats]

Nope, just using them as an example of a group that is detested. Pron merchants who don't mind their product being consumed by children as also detested, though apparently not quite as much.

The group of people being prevented from entering school premises includes everyone who doesn't have business on the school premises. The KKK can walk right down the street if they want. They're only restricted in assembling in large numbers the same way as any public gathering that grows large enough to need permit.

 

[pknopp]

IOW, the police would not be acting illegally in restricting their 1st Amendment rights, which is my point. They are on public property and they are expressing political speech yet can legally be prevented from doing so. Thank you.

Blocking access to schools doors is not a Constitutional right. No idea why you would think it is.

 

[hadit]

The group of people being prevented from entering school premises includes everyone who doesn't have business on the school premises. The KKK can walk right down the street if they want. They're only restricted in assembling in large numbers the same way as any public gathering that grows large enough to need permit.

Again, infringements on their right to speak. You're making my point, which is that we infringe on the 1st when we consider something else to be more important. No one can make the point that a right is absolute. The government can restrict me from carrying a firearm on certain public properties, bars and libraries for instance, and no one bats an eye. It can move me away from the front door of a school and prevent me from speaking at that place and time.

The point is, using the 1st Amendment to deny efforts to protect children from pron is a non-starter.

 

[pknopp]

Again, infringements on their right to speak. You're making my point, which is that we infringe on the 1st when we consider something else to be more important. No one can make the point that a right is absolute. The government can restrict me from carrying a firearm on certain public properties, bars and libraries for instance, and no one bats an eye. It can move me away from the front door of a school and prevent me from speaking at that place and time.

The point is, using the 1st Amendment to deny efforts to protect children from pron is a non-starter.

As nearly everyone has agreed, it is going to do very little to stop minors from accessing porn.

 

[Curried Goats]

Again, infringements on their right to speak. You're making my point, which is that we infringe on the 1st when we consider something else to be more important. No one can make the point that a right is absolute. The government can restrict me from carrying a firearm on certain public properties, bars and libraries for instance, and no one bats an eye. It can move me away from the front door of a school and prevent me from speaking at that place and time.

The point is, using the 1st Amendment to deny efforts to protect children from pron is a non-starter.

What infringements on their right to speak? You haven't detailed any. You've detailed restrictions on who can enter a public school and gain access to children (which is everyone who has no business being at the school) and the need to get a permit when your gathering gets too big which is about public safety, not restrictions on speech.

 

[hadit]

Blocking access to schools doors is not a Constitutional right. No idea why you would think it is.

The same can be said of a public sidewalk, yet the 1st holds sway there. What's the difference? In a school, the government has to protect the kids and they can't just be whisked away. On a public sidewalk, children can be taken away by their parents. In both cases someone wants to speak. In both cases, they want to do it on public property. In one case, they are prevented while in the other they are allowed.

My point has been that the 1st Amendment is not something pron producers should be able to hide behind when it comes to protecting children from their product.

 

[hadit]

As nearly everyone has agreed, it is going to do very little to stop minors from accessing porn.

So we take the next step and provide consequences for sites knowingly allowing children on. Put it on them to have gates. We put the onus on producers of dangerous products to make sure they give kids access to them, let's do it here.

 

[Curried Goats]

The same can be said of a public sidewalk, yet the 1st holds sway there. What's the difference? In a school, the government has to protect the kids and they can't just be whisked away. On a public sidewalk, children can be taken away by their parents. In both cases someone wants to speak. In both cases, they want to do it on public property. In one case, they are prevented while in the other they are allowed.

My point has been that the 1st Amendment is not something pron producers should be able to hide behind when it comes to protecting children from their product.

Are you confused because they both have the word public in there?

Just because it's a public school doesn't mean you should think of it as similar to a public sidewalk, street or space.

 

[hadit]

What infringements on their right to speak? You haven't detailed any. You've detailed restrictions on who can enter a public school and gain access to children (which is everyone who has no business being at the school) and the need to get a permit when your gathering gets too big which is about public safety, not restrictions on speech.

I didn't say anything about entering a school. You said that. I said try to hold a KKK rally at the front door or on the steps in front of a school while kids are in class and you will be removed. That's an infringement on your 1st Amendment rights that we accept because of higher priority issues.

 

[pknopp]

The same can be said of a public sidewalk, yet the 1st holds sway there.

Well no, you can't block a sidewalk either. You can protest from it but can't block it.

What's the difference? In a school, the government has to protect the kids and they can't just be whisked away. On a public sidewalk, children can be taken away by their parents. In both cases someone wants to speak. In both cases, they want to do it on public property. In one case, they are prevented while in the other they are allowed.

My point has been that the 1st Amendment is not something pron producers should be able to hide behind when it comes to protecting children from their product.

You are just making crap up that you have no idea about.

 

[hadit]

Are you confused because they both have the word public in there?

Just because it's a public school doesn't mean you should think of it as similar to a public sidewalk, street or space.

You're making my point. We restrict the freedoms of assembly and speech because we're protecting children.

 

[pknopp]

So we take the next step and provide consequences for sites knowingly allowing children on. Put it on them to have gates. We put the onus on producers of dangerous products to make sure they give kids access to them, let's do it here.

If a bill is introduced we can discuss it.

 

[Curried Goats]

I didn't say anything about entering a school. You said that. I said try to hold a KKK rally at the front door or on the steps in front of a school while kids are in class and you will be removed. That's an infringement on your 1st Amendment rights that we accept because of higher priority issues.

Those are school grounds. You really are confused about the difference between a public school and public space, aren't you?

 

[hadit]

Well no, you can't block a sidewalk either. You can protest from it but can't block it.

That's splitting hairs. You're blocking the space you're standing in, but you're allowed to do it. You don't have to protest while walking so you don't get in anyone's way.

You are just making crap up that you have no idea about.

Do you believe pron producers' 1st Amendment rights should take priority over efforts to protect children from their products? I saw people trying to make that point and am opposing it.

 

[hadit]

If a bill is introduced we can discuss it.

I would like to.

 

[hadit]

Those are school grounds. You really are confused about the difference between a public school and public space, aren't you?

Again, the 1st is overridden in those areas. The 2nd is as well when guns are forbidden on school grounds. We accept those infringements, yes?

It follows then that we can accept some infringement on the rights of pron producers when it comes to children accessing their products, also yes?