I think this is a case of a new-ish Doper getting that lonely, not-quite-fitting-in feeling. A “Stupid ______ of the Day” seems like just the thing to flush out potential compadres.
I remember Miss Green Text Spaulding doing the same thing. It didn’t work for her either.
The Constitution is a simple document.
Luckily for everyone, though, Constitutionality isn’t decided by the document itself, but by the Supreme Court.
So the simplicity of the First Amendment (which doesn’t really say anything at all) is irrelevant. (And don’t think that I didn’t notice you moving the goal post from a discussion of what’s Constitutional to what the Constitution says.)
The fact is that nobody has an inherent right to speak whenever & wherever they want. The First Amendment doesn’t protect these actions–it’s why the powers that be are allowed to remove them for the premises or have them arrested.
Constitutionality has no place in this discussion.
The protesters were allowed to do what they did because the event hosts let them do what they did–not because their actions were Constitutionally protected. The same goes for calling the protesters mean names–it can be done because people allow it to be done. The Constitution has nothing to do with it.
Like I said–not that simple, “kid”.
You’re wrong. It became pejorative, but SJWs chose to call themselves that way, and still self-identify as such.
Really? What law, exactly, do you think is being violated in that video?
I’m not familiar with where it is to say what law exactly.
But in general, that act is a form of either public disturbance or trespass (or both).
For the same reason that some people think “niggerlover” is a pejorative.
Thank you. This is excellent and I agree unequivocally - particularly about the distinction between Social Justice Warriors (people complaining about “discrimination” or trivial “offensive” stuff) and social justice activists working to like MLK, Ghandi, the Suffragettes etc.
Seriously? You guys have all of YouTube at your disposal to find examples and you’re still arguing over definitions?
Internet Tough Guy is an insult to. Using the same logic - why? Isn’t ‘tough’ a good thing to be?
SJW is sarcastic. The people using it don’t think their targets are any sort of warrior, social-justice or otherwise
That’s not the name of that country. It’s Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
Splitter!
There are plenty of schools, such as my alma mater (University of California, Davis), which have sworn police officers who have the same police powers as every other sworn police officer in their state.
It doesn’t matter where the action in the video occurred; your assertion was that such actions would have gotten one arrested where you attended school. The question, then, is obviously what law or laws would be violated where you attended school. One would presume you are familiar with that particular venue.
It got the King of the Temper Tantrums the job in the white house.
Gandhi? The Hinduvata supporting, anal fixation having, young girl bed warmer keeping, black hating failed Barrister was for social justice? That Gandhi?
Welp. New day, time for a new Stupid SJW bullshit, I guess.
Here’s an idea: Let’s just have one Stupid SJW bullshit per day, for a change.
Okay, somebody go. I can’t post one myself, 'cos I didn’t look at the first one. Wouldn’t want to post a duplicate right out of the gate.
BTW, is it the SJW bullshit that needs to be stupid to fit the thread, or could it be any bullshit that’s produced by a stupid SJW?
I’ll leave it to people more educated and familiar with Gandhi than I, but I’m pretty sure that you’re talking about the same person. In my experience, outside of the few circles, overall, Gandhi is thought of as someone who fought for social justice issues.
Like purported concerns about ethics in video games journalism?
You mean by Westerners whose only knowledge of Gandhi is from a movie. Gandhi the man who went on a fast unto death against proposals to give untouchables civil and electoral rights. Guy who had no problem with the way Blacks were treated in South Africa and fought to keep the laws that way? Gandhi fought for social justice issues alright, specifically his right as a Brahmin to be treated equal to whites, not the same as those “Untouchables” or Blacks.
You mean Western countries like South Africa & Botswana, where public opinion generally matches that of Superdude’s?
I don’t know much about Gandhi, but given that he has received numerous honourable mentions from post-apartheid leaders, (cites available) I suspect the situation was a bit more nuanced than what you’ve stated.
This SJW CEO is easily offended by most humans, claiming that they suck. It was triggering for him sift thru so many of these applicants who didn’t square with his rigid dogma, so he devised a mandatory SJW test to separate the chaff and now his company culture can operate more like a safe space. He claims the company boasts lots of juice boxes, a soothing physical therapist, and an office puppy. (I’m sure coloring books are included as well; he is only being modest.)