Rex_Goodheart
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-15-07 08:17 AM
Original message |
|
Protected free speech especially when given ahead of the act?
"Here's some money for you because I agree with what you're doing. OK, if you don't mind, let's go have sex now."
Wouldn't the Supreme Court's RIDICULOUS decisions protecting the payment of money as "free speech" apply to just about EVERY transfer of cash?
|
rfranklin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-15-07 08:20 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Only if you are paying her to say you are a great lay and.... |
|
that your member is 8 inches.
|
Katherine Brengle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-15-07 08:21 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Transferring money is NOT speech. |
|
Not by a long shot.
What a load of horse shit.
|
RaleighNCDUer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-15-07 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. You know there are those who would have no restrictions on |
|
political donations, because donating cash to a campaign is free speech.
And, yes, I agree it is horseshit.
|
TechBear_Seattle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-15-07 08:28 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. Tell that to the courts |
|
The idea that transferring money is free speech is how corporations have managed to take over the country, as corporations can make the kind of financial contributions to candidates and parties that even rich individuals could only dream of.
|
spindoctor
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-15-07 08:27 AM
Response to Original message |
4. Aren't politicians who accept money from lobbyists prostitutes? |
|
They sell their soul and integrity instead of their body and social standing but other than that...pretty much the same thing.
|
TechBear_Seattle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-15-07 08:30 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. All elections are bought |
|
The only question is by whom and how much they paid. While I agree with your sentiment, keep in mind that your argument holds that the only difference between a candidate who accepts only small, individual donations and a candidate who all but demands very large corporate contributions is that one is a streetwalker and the other a high price "escort."
|
spindoctor
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-15-07 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. Exactly. That is why I am against any form of donation. |
|
You see, paying a government official in return for a favor is called corruption in actual democratic countries.
You can't have just a little bit of sex and still call yourself a virgin.
|
AngryAmish
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-15-07 08:42 AM
Response to Original message |
8. What if the gov't said you can own a printing press, just not buy one |
|
So the transference of cash or other consideration for a printing press is illegal. If you can make, inherent or be given a printing press it is OK. Under that scenario that may infringe on the 1st Amendment.
|
aikoaiko
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-15-07 09:19 AM
Response to Original message |
9. What you wrote is protected speech for prostitutes and their customers. |
|
The modern call girl is explicit. She asks for money to spend time with you and perhaps, independently, she might be interested in sex.
Apparently it works as a defense.
|
Katherine Brengle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-15-07 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. It works because the culture *wants* it to work -- |
|
not because it makes any sense.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 12:24 AM
Response to Original message |