• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Racism in the Military

exNavyOffRec said:
They are right now in several places in the country.
Click to expand...
No they are not. You are free to practice your religion, just not in large groups.
(And oh by the way the SCOTUS ruled last week that these limitations are not unconstitutional-read about it)
Don’t forget the Protests in Minnesota, Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Michigan, against “tyrannical” governors
 
Treetop Flyer said:
Cool, online protests only from now on. The scary virus applies to the whole first amendment.
Click to expand...

That’s the thing about protests...they’re a way to push back against the system.

Trying to bottle up these protesters would be about as effective as trying to bottle up a bunch of guys walking around with rifles at the State Capitol. Oh wait...
 
Nasty Flyer said:
No they are not. You are free to practice your religion, just not in large groups.
(And oh by the way the SCOTUS ruled last week that these limitations are not unconstitutional-read about it)
Don’t forget the Protests in Minnesota, Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Michigan, against “tyrannical” governors
Click to expand...
I’m aware of the shameful Supreme Court decision. Protests should be treated the same but of course we know why they aren’t.
 
Treetop Flyer said:
If church services can be banned without infringing on peoples right to practice their religion, then crushing peaceful protests is fine too. They are free to protest from home.
Click to expand...
So...black clad troopers charging into church spraying tear gas and packing heat...I missed that news report.
 
Treetop Flyer said:
I’m aware of the shameful Supreme Court decision. Protests should be treated the same but of course we know why they aren’t.
Click to expand...
Why is it shameful?
A California church had limitations placed on the number of people who could attend the service.

Kavanaugh compared it to grocery Stores, but Roberts said that’s not a fair comparison nor ingenuous argument. That a more fair comparison is a concert or a sporting event because of the nature of the meeting place.

They did not ban religious services, they are not arresting people for being of a certain religion, they’re allowing people to practice their religion- they are allowing people to meet to practice a religion. They’re just temporarily capping the number of attendees, and the Supreme Court said that is allowable because it is Equal Protection of the Law.

no different than the fire Marshall placing limitations on the building capacity in the interest of public safety.
 
Nasty Flyer said:
Why is it shameful?
A California church had limitations placed on the number of people who could attend the service.

Kavanaugh compared it to grocery Stores, but Roberts said that’s not a fair comparison nor ingenuous argument. That a more fair comparison is a concert or a sporting event because of the nature of the meeting place.

They did not ban religious services, they are not arresting people for being of a certain religion, they’re allowing people to practice their religion- they are allowing people to meet to practice a religion. They’re just temporarily capping the number of attendees, and the Supreme Court said that is allowable because it is Equal Protection of the Law.

no different than the fire Marshall placing limitations in the building capacity.
Click to expand...
But not for protests. Cool.
 
Nasty Flyer said:
No they are not. You are free to practice your religion, just not in large groups.
(And oh by the way the SCOTUS ruled last week that these limitations are not unconstitutional-read about it)
Don’t forget the Protests in Minnesota, Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Michigan, against “tyrannical” governors
Click to expand...
up until a few weeks ago in some places it was no groups, not even drive up.

and yes, if a limit was placed on the number of people attending that is still the ability to practice, that is what most places have done now.
 
Nasty Flyer said:
Have you been watching? The protestors are being gassed out and there are curfews in place. Don’t act like nothing is being done.
Click to expand...
The curfews are for looting. Legitimate protests don’t happen in the middle of the night. I’m simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the people saying how important it is to protect the right for people to peaceably assemble and protest but not to assemble to worship, which are both guaranteed by the first amendment. People should be allowed to decide for themselves if they want to join a giant protest, just as they should be free to attend church in whatever numbers they’re comfortable with.
 
Nasty Flyer said:
No they are not. You are free to practice your religion, just not in large groups.
(And oh by the way the SCOTUS ruled last week that these limitations are not unconstitutional-read about it)
Don’t forget the Protests in Minnesota, Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Michigan, against “tyrannical” governors
Click to expand...
Point of order - SCOTUS did not rule on constitutionality. They just declined to grant an injunction while the lawsuit goes forward. Big difference.
 
nittany03 said:
Point of order - SCOTUS did not rule on constitutionality. They just declined to grant an injunction while the lawsuit goes forward. Big difference.
Click to expand...
Fair enough-result is the same. And unlikely to be reversed.
 
nittany03 said:
Point of order - SCOTUS did not rule on constitutionality. They just declined to grant an injunction while the lawsuit goes forward. Big difference.
Click to expand...
Thank you! Strong, was your legal officer instruction. Retained you did.
Nasty Flyer said:
Fair enough-result is the same. And unlikely to be reversed.
Click to expand...
Not true. You simply cannot be sure. Granting an injunction is a big deal. It is throwing the weight of the highest court in the land behind an order without a full hearing of the facts and arguments, sometimes even before lower courts have weighed in. The bar is high because it short circuits the system.
 
wink said:
@Spekkio , I can know why people riot and not approve of it. Are you saying it is ok to riot if you are agrieved over racism? Anyone that believes that is more problematic then me. That my friends are the low expectations too many people have for minorities. Not expecting they can control emotion and be respectful. You are making excuses for criminals and demeaning the good people who peacefully protest and still respect other peoples life and property.
Click to expand...
Arguing over when it is or isn't okay to riot is the wrong conversation, and is frankly irrelevant.

How do we get police to stop murdering people, and how do we get them to hold themselves more accountable so people don't want to riot is the right conversation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top