logo Sign In

Mrebo

User Group
Members
Join date
20-Mar-2011
Last activity
13-Feb-2025
Posts
3,400

Post History

Post
#1178467
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

ChainsawAsh said:

Mrebo said:

I raise the point to show how inconvenient and even dangerous protections of liberty can be.

I think the existence of the second amendment and the way it’s been interpreted is a pretty solid showcase of this as well.

I think we’re getting to a good place where Frink wants to arm white supremacist teachers and I want to repeal the 1st Amendment. This is the stuff that makes it so worthwhile to debate politics. Still, I think guns for hunting (even if I cannot understand the appeal) and self defense (even if I don’t feel the need for one) makes more sense than being compelled to keep white supremacist teachers in our schools.

Post
#1178461
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

moviefreakmind, agree it’s not the kind of person we want teaching kids. But, as you now admit, when the government takes adverse action like firing that implicates the 1st Amendment. Whether some voices deserve oppression doesn’t make it non-oppression, as I’d think you’d agree if she were fired for being a Hindu or transgender.

I raise the point to show how inconvenient and even dangerous protections of liberty can be. I think the school will have an easy time getting rid of this particular teacher, as I said. And that’s a good thing. But if you really think white supremacists should never be teachers, we gotta do something about the 1st Amendment. Your “common right wing talking points” preface is irrelevant.

Post
#1178448
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

ChainsawAsh said:

Mrebo said:

TV’s Frink said:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/florida-public-school-teacher-white-nationalist-podcast_us_5a99ae32e4b089ec353a1fba

Obviously the best solution to this is to give her a gun while she’s teaching.

That would be a bad idea. We do have a horrible 1st Amendment that allows her to do her podcast without repercussions like being fired. Time to repeal that amendment too? Maybe we can avoid that problem in this case if she expressed these statements in school (as she said she did and lied to the principal) or discriminates against students. But do we ever want white supremacists in our schools?

She can totally be fired for that, can’t she? Just not jailed or legally barred from making and distributing her podcast?

No. Public schools, or any other government employer, can’t punish people for their beliefs and expressions. If she brings it into the classroom that’s another matter, which may be the case here.

Post
#1178440
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

TV’s Frink said:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/florida-public-school-teacher-white-nationalist-podcast_us_5a99ae32e4b089ec353a1fba

Obviously the best solution to this is to give her a gun while she’s teaching.

That would be a bad idea. We do have a horrible 1st Amendment that allows her to do her podcast without repercussions like being fired. Time to repeal that amendment too? Maybe we can avoid that problem in this case if she expressed these statements in school (as she said she did and lied to the principal) or discriminates against students. But do we ever want white supremacists in our schools?

Post
#1178115
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

CatBus, the Bill of Rights were not a grant of power to the government. In terms of the scope of the right, you quickly run into problems if the federal government imposes all manner of restrictions on individual ownership: it tramples on the state prerogative to have militias. The Amendment pretty clearly protected individual ownership of arms because of the state prerogative. It says so. You’re right that arms are not only guns. For example knives are a kind of arm. The Court held that the scope of the right extends only to weapons that would be normally posessed for use in a militia and excludes dangerous and unusual weapons. That is the originalist holding. The idea that state militias would be compelled to use outdated technology doesn’t make sense. When we consider the free exercise clause we don’t limit it to religions that existed at our founding but that doesn’t make it non-originalist.