founding documents give us the right to show up and peacefully assemble and seek redress of grievances. we have the right to do that. this is exactly what is happening outside the justices' homes. they want a redress of grievances. it is legal. this idea goes all the way back to the magna carta.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway
founding documents give us the right to show up and peacefully assemble and seek redress of grievances. we have the right to do that. this is exactly what is happening outside the justices' homes. they want a redress of grievances. it is legal. this idea goes all the way back to the magna carta.
again, I never said it was illegal. I just think that it can lead to something more egregious by some nutjob down the line.
I agree with Hugh. The left should not stoop to the right's level and attempt to intimidate a person by protesting in front of their home. And to me, I see it as an attempt to intimidate.
I agree with Hugh. The left should not stoop to the right's level and attempt to intimidate a person by protesting in front of their home. And to me, I see it as an attempt to intimidate.
Is it intimidation if they were to stand in silence with lit candles? How about if they recite the Lord’s Prayer repeatedly?
And thus far, “the left is not stooping to the right’s level.” Not even close.
I can’t believe you guys are falling for this after what we’ve witnessed over the past almost 6-7 years. The left continues to be demonized for doth protesting too much and the needle indicating what’s normal, acceptable or how it should be continues to move to the right. You’re going to wake up one day and wonder what the fuck happened to the US.
”The SCOTUS leak is a greater threat to our democracy than 1/6.” That wee little peaceful protest at the Capitol? Meh.
yeah, sure, we're falling for it. falling for knowing how to be objective and not constantly outraged by everything in the news cycle every single day.
I agree with Hugh. The left should not stoop to the right's level and attempt to intimidate a person by protesting in front of their home. And to me, I see it as an attempt to intimidate.
let me know when we show up with ar-15s.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway
I agree with Hugh. The left should not stoop to the right's level and attempt to intimidate a person by protesting in front of their home. And to me, I see it as an attempt to intimidate.
i'm really, really sorry that people are showing up and making the justices feel discomfort. maybe they will accept my thoughts and prayers during this trying time.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway
yeah, sure, we're falling for it. falling for knowing how to be objective and not constantly outraged by everything in the news cycle every single day.
Oh please. I thought it was my “obsession?” By Calvin Klein?
IMHO you are falling for it. You’re seemingly not seeing the effect of comparing what one side does, regularly, and what the other not so bad side does and either equating them, saying they’re both wrong or that they’re both unethical. Your attitude, thought process or complacency, for lack of a better word or descriptor, is exactly the desired effect. Pretty soon the only “safe spaces” for peaceful protest will be in designated pens far removed from the object of protest. Like the 2004 Repub National Convention. Unless you’re white, Christian and armed. Then everything and everywhere is fair game.
Nope. I can look at each event and decide what level of outrage, if any, is required for each. I don't need to compare to decide.
How am I falling for something when I'm of the same opinion on this matter as I would have been 20 years ago?
Frankly, I'm not outraged at the protests at the homes. I merely stated that I didn't think it was appropriate. It makes me mildly uncomfortable, if you will. Now, showing up at a ledge with ar-15's in tow? yeah, that's quite concerning. that's another level of intimidation unto itself.
Your slippery slope concern isn't valid. They can protest wherever they want. I just have a line, and that line is personal residences. It's a lower level of intimidation that has the potential for escalation. When you involve a person's residence, you are potentially involving people that have no business being involved; the justices' children, families, staff, friends, what have you. That's my issue.
I agree with Hugh. The left should not stoop to the right's level and attempt to intimidate a person by protesting in front of their home. And to me, I see it as an attempt to intimidate.
yeah, sure, we're falling for it. falling for knowing how to be objective and not constantly outraged by everything in the news cycle every single day.
Oh please. I thought it was my “obsession?” By Calvin Klein?
IMHO you are falling for it. You’re seemingly not seeing the effect of comparing what one side does, regularly, and what the other not so bad side does and either equating them, saying they’re both wrong or that they’re both unethical. Your attitude, thought process or complacency, for lack of a better word or descriptor, is exactly the desired effect. Pretty soon the only “safe spaces” for peaceful protest will be in designated pens far removed from the object of protest. Like the 2004 Repub National Convention. Unless you’re white, Christian and armed. Then everything and everywhere is fair game.
No, you're treating this as a comparative, and Hugh and I are not. We are starting with the statement "I don't think people should protest in front of anyone's home". That's it. Doesn't matter if it is right or left, believe in the cause or not.
I agree with Hugh. The left should not stoop to the right's level and attempt to intimidate a person by protesting in front of their home. And to me, I see it as an attempt to intimidate.
Nope. I can look at each event and decide what level of outrage, if any, is required for each. I don't need to compare to decide.
How am I falling for something when I'm of the same opinion on this matter as I would have been 20 years ago?
Frankly, I'm not outraged at the protests at the homes. I merely stated that I didn't think it was appropriate. It makes me mildly uncomfortable, if you will. Now, showing up at a ledge with ar-15's in tow? yeah, that's quite concerning. that's another level of intimidation unto itself.
Your slippery slope concern isn't valid. They can protest wherever they want. I just have a line, and that line is personal residences. It's a lower level of intimidation that has the potential for escalation. When you involve a person's residence, you are potentially involving people that have no business being involved; the justices' children, families, staff, friends, what have you. That's my issue.
I have a slightly different take. We don't vote for the Justices. They do not answer to us. They can go thru their entire lives never appearing in public or answering questions to us, to the media, to anybody.
Quite frankly, I'm surprised they live on residential streets and not in a private compound. I'm sure that's about to change, and the public will have zero ability for them to hear us. Of course this is enhanced by their lifetime appointments.
SCOTUS said the right to protest can not even be buffered by a 35 foot zone. Well, if anyone ever deserved to suffer from their own bad decisions, Its this Court
yeah, sure, we're falling for it. falling for knowing how to be objective and not constantly outraged by everything in the news cycle every single day.
Oh please. I thought it was my “obsession?” By Calvin Klein?
IMHO you are falling for it. You’re seemingly not seeing the effect of comparing what one side does, regularly, and what the other not so bad side does and either equating them, saying they’re both wrong or that they’re both unethical. Your attitude, thought process or complacency, for lack of a better word or descriptor, is exactly the desired effect. Pretty soon the only “safe spaces” for peaceful protest will be in designated pens far removed from the object of protest. Like the 2004 Repub National Convention. Unless you’re white, Christian and armed. Then everything and everywhere is fair game.
No, you're treating this as a comparative, and Hugh and I are not. We are starting with the statement "I don't think people should protest in front of anyone's home". That's it. Doesn't matter if it is right or left, believe in the cause or not.
So public spaces are a no go for exercising constitutionally protected rights? Because there are residences there?
Funny that other posters have posted similar situations, just that they weren’t SCOTUS, and there have been a bunch of others to make the news and nary a peep about protesting in front of residences. Guess SCOTUS is special?
Nope. I can look at each event and decide what level of outrage, if any, is required for each. I don't need to compare to decide.
How am I falling for something when I'm of the same opinion on this matter as I would have been 20 years ago?
Frankly, I'm not outraged at the protests at the homes. I merely stated that I didn't think it was appropriate. It makes me mildly uncomfortable, if you will. Now, showing up at a ledge with ar-15's in tow? yeah, that's quite concerning. that's another level of intimidation unto itself.
Your slippery slope concern isn't valid. They can protest wherever they want. I just have a line, and that line is personal residences. It's a lower level of intimidation that has the potential for escalation. When you involve a person's residence, you are potentially involving people that have no business being involved; the justices' children, families, staff, friends, what have you. That's my issue.
Because I don’t recall your “outrage”, your term not mine, at any other manner of protest, whether it was God hates fags at military funerals, the daily clinic protests and “intimidation” that occurs, the shouting down of school committee meetings and candidate forums or armed protesters occupying state houses. But peaceful protest outside a SCOTUS residence, or in mrussel’s case, any residence, crosses a line. Okay, weird.
Doesn’t any protest have the potential to involve people that have no business being involved or to attract “nut cases?”
And no, “they” cannot protest anywhere they want. Or do you mean like on interstate highways during rush hour?
yeah, sure, we're falling for it. falling for knowing how to be objective and not constantly outraged by everything in the news cycle every single day.
Oh please. I thought it was my “obsession?” By Calvin Klein?
IMHO you are falling for it. You’re seemingly not seeing the effect of comparing what one side does, regularly, and what the other not so bad side does and either equating them, saying they’re both wrong or that they’re both unethical. Your attitude, thought process or complacency, for lack of a better word or descriptor, is exactly the desired effect. Pretty soon the only “safe spaces” for peaceful protest will be in designated pens far removed from the object of protest. Like the 2004 Repub National Convention. Unless you’re white, Christian and armed. Then everything and everywhere is fair game.
No, you're treating this as a comparative, and Hugh and I are not. We are starting with the statement "I don't think people should protest in front of anyone's home". That's it. Doesn't matter if it is right or left, believe in the cause or not.
So public spaces are a no go for exercising constitutionally protected rights? Because there are residences there?
Funny that other posters have posted similar situations, just that they weren’t SCOTUS, and there have been a bunch of others to make the news and nary a peep about protesting in front of residences. Guess SCOTUS is special?
I didn't say it was illegal or not constitutionally protected, I said I don't think it should be done.
yeah, sure, we're falling for it. falling for knowing how to be objective and not constantly outraged by everything in the news cycle every single day.
Oh please. I thought it was my “obsession?” By Calvin Klein?
IMHO you are falling for it. You’re seemingly not seeing the effect of comparing what one side does, regularly, and what the other not so bad side does and either equating them, saying they’re both wrong or that they’re both unethical. Your attitude, thought process or complacency, for lack of a better word or descriptor, is exactly the desired effect. Pretty soon the only “safe spaces” for peaceful protest will be in designated pens far removed from the object of protest. Like the 2004 Repub National Convention. Unless you’re white, Christian and armed. Then everything and everywhere is fair game.
No, you're treating this as a comparative, and Hugh and I are not. We are starting with the statement "I don't think people should protest in front of anyone's home". That's it. Doesn't matter if it is right or left, believe in the cause or not.
So public spaces are a no go for exercising constitutionally protected rights? Because there are residences there?
Funny that other posters have posted similar situations, just that they weren’t SCOTUS, and there have been a bunch of others to make the news and nary a peep about protesting in front of residences. Guess SCOTUS is special?
I didn't say it was illegal or not constitutionally protected, I said I don't think it should be done.
I didn’t claim that you said or thought either of those things. I understand you think it shouldn’t be done. I’m trying to understand why you think that.
What makes peaceful protest outside of any residence unacceptable to you? Should it be restricted or illegal? To peacefully protest outside any residence?
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
yeah, sure, we're falling for it. falling for knowing how to be objective and not constantly outraged by everything in the news cycle every single day.
Oh please. I thought it was my “obsession?” By Calvin Klein?
IMHO you are falling for it. You’re seemingly not seeing the effect of comparing what one side does, regularly, and what the other not so bad side does and either equating them, saying they’re both wrong or that they’re both unethical. Your attitude, thought process or complacency, for lack of a better word or descriptor, is exactly the desired effect. Pretty soon the only “safe spaces” for peaceful protest will be in designated pens far removed from the object of protest. Like the 2004 Repub National Convention. Unless you’re white, Christian and armed. Then everything and everywhere is fair game.
No, you're treating this as a comparative, and Hugh and I are not. We are starting with the statement "I don't think people should protest in front of anyone's home". That's it. Doesn't matter if it is right or left, believe in the cause or not.
So public spaces are a no go for exercising constitutionally protected rights? Because there are residences there?
Funny that other posters have posted similar situations, just that they weren’t SCOTUS, and there have been a bunch of others to make the news and nary a peep about protesting in front of residences. Guess SCOTUS is special?
I didn't say it was illegal or not constitutionally protected, I said I don't think it should be done.
I didn’t claim that you said or thought either of those things. I understand you think it shouldn’t be done. I’m trying to understand why you think that.
What makes peaceful protest outside of any residence unacceptable to you? Should it be restricted or illegal? To peacefully protest outside any residence?
I think a person should have their privacy at home. Yes, I believe in privacy even for justices who don't.
yeah, sure, we're falling for it. falling for knowing how to be objective and not constantly outraged by everything in the news cycle every single day.
Oh please. I thought it was my “obsession?” By Calvin Klein?
IMHO you are falling for it. You’re seemingly not seeing the effect of comparing what one side does, regularly, and what the other not so bad side does and either equating them, saying they’re both wrong or that they’re both unethical. Your attitude, thought process or complacency, for lack of a better word or descriptor, is exactly the desired effect. Pretty soon the only “safe spaces” for peaceful protest will be in designated pens far removed from the object of protest. Like the 2004 Repub National Convention. Unless you’re white, Christian and armed. Then everything and everywhere is fair game.
No, you're treating this as a comparative, and Hugh and I are not. We are starting with the statement "I don't think people should protest in front of anyone's home". That's it. Doesn't matter if it is right or left, believe in the cause or not.
So public spaces are a no go for exercising constitutionally protected rights? Because there are residences there?
Funny that other posters have posted similar situations, just that they weren’t SCOTUS, and there have been a bunch of others to make the news and nary a peep about protesting in front of residences. Guess SCOTUS is special?
I didn't say it was illegal or not constitutionally protected, I said I don't think it should be done.
I didn’t claim that you said or thought either of those things. I understand you think it shouldn’t be done. I’m trying to understand why you think that.
What makes peaceful protest outside of any residence unacceptable to you? Should it be restricted or illegal? To peacefully protest outside any residence?
I think a person should have their privacy at home. Yes, I believe in privacy even for justices who don't.
i'd appoint you to the court.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway
Nope. I can look at each event and decide what level of outrage, if any, is required for each. I don't need to compare to decide.
How am I falling for something when I'm of the same opinion on this matter as I would have been 20 years ago?
Frankly, I'm not outraged at the protests at the homes. I merely stated that I didn't think it was appropriate. It makes me mildly uncomfortable, if you will. Now, showing up at a ledge with ar-15's in tow? yeah, that's quite concerning. that's another level of intimidation unto itself.
Your slippery slope concern isn't valid. They can protest wherever they want. I just have a line, and that line is personal residences. It's a lower level of intimidation that has the potential for escalation. When you involve a person's residence, you are potentially involving people that have no business being involved; the justices' children, families, staff, friends, what have you. That's my issue.
Because I don’t recall your “outrage”, your term not mine, at any other manner of protest, whether it was God hates fags at military funerals, the daily clinic protests and “intimidation” that occurs, the shouting down of school committee meetings and candidate forums or armed protesters occupying state houses. But peaceful protest outside a SCOTUS residence, or in mrussel’s case, any residence, crosses a line. Okay, weird.
Doesn’t any protest have the potential to involve people that have no business being involved or to attract “nut cases?”
And no, “they” cannot protest anywhere they want. Or do you mean like on interstate highways during rush hour?
not every thought I have ever had is put in print here on this website.
Nope. I can look at each event and decide what level of outrage, if any, is required for each. I don't need to compare to decide.
How am I falling for something when I'm of the same opinion on this matter as I would have been 20 years ago?
Frankly, I'm not outraged at the protests at the homes. I merely stated that I didn't think it was appropriate. It makes me mildly uncomfortable, if you will. Now, showing up at a ledge with ar-15's in tow? yeah, that's quite concerning. that's another level of intimidation unto itself.
Your slippery slope concern isn't valid. They can protest wherever they want. I just have a line, and that line is personal residences. It's a lower level of intimidation that has the potential for escalation. When you involve a person's residence, you are potentially involving people that have no business being involved; the justices' children, families, staff, friends, what have you. That's my issue.
Because I don’t recall your “outrage”, your term not mine, at any other manner of protest, whether it was God hates fags at military funerals, the daily clinic protests and “intimidation” that occurs, the shouting down of school committee meetings and candidate forums or armed protesters occupying state houses. But peaceful protest outside a SCOTUS residence, or in mrussel’s case, any residence, crosses a line. Okay, weird.
Doesn’t any protest have the potential to involve people that have no business being involved or to attract “nut cases?”
And no, “they” cannot protest anywhere they want. Or do you mean like on interstate highways during rush hour?
not every thought I have ever had is put in print here on this website.
Nope. I can look at each event and decide what level of outrage, if any, is required for each. I don't need to compare to decide.
How am I falling for something when I'm of the same opinion on this matter as I would have been 20 years ago?
Frankly, I'm not outraged at the protests at the homes. I merely stated that I didn't think it was appropriate. It makes me mildly uncomfortable, if you will. Now, showing up at a ledge with ar-15's in tow? yeah, that's quite concerning. that's another level of intimidation unto itself.
Your slippery slope concern isn't valid. They can protest wherever they want. I just have a line, and that line is personal residences. It's a lower level of intimidation that has the potential for escalation. When you involve a person's residence, you are potentially involving people that have no business being involved; the justices' children, families, staff, friends, what have you. That's my issue.
Because I don’t recall your “outrage”, your term not mine, at any other manner of protest, whether it was God hates fags at military funerals, the daily clinic protests and “intimidation” that occurs, the shouting down of school committee meetings and candidate forums or armed protesters occupying state houses. But peaceful protest outside a SCOTUS residence, or in mrussel’s case, any residence, crosses a line. Okay, weird.
Doesn’t any protest have the potential to involve people that have no business being involved or to attract “nut cases?”
And no, “they” cannot protest anywhere they want. Or do you mean like on interstate highways during rush hour?
I obviously meant anywhere they are legally allowed to do so. But sure, we'll go with your "literal take as snappy rebuttal attempt".
Nope. I can look at each event and decide what level of outrage, if any, is required for each. I don't need to compare to decide.
How am I falling for something when I'm of the same opinion on this matter as I would have been 20 years ago?
Frankly, I'm not outraged at the protests at the homes. I merely stated that I didn't think it was appropriate. It makes me mildly uncomfortable, if you will. Now, showing up at a ledge with ar-15's in tow? yeah, that's quite concerning. that's another level of intimidation unto itself.
Your slippery slope concern isn't valid. They can protest wherever they want. I just have a line, and that line is personal residences. It's a lower level of intimidation that has the potential for escalation. When you involve a person's residence, you are potentially involving people that have no business being involved; the justices' children, families, staff, friends, what have you. That's my issue.
Because I don’t recall your “outrage”, your term not mine, at any other manner of protest, whether it was God hates fags at military funerals, the daily clinic protests and “intimidation” that occurs, the shouting down of school committee meetings and candidate forums or armed protesters occupying state houses. But peaceful protest outside a SCOTUS residence, or in mrussel’s case, any residence, crosses a line. Okay, weird.
Doesn’t any protest have the potential to involve people that have no business being involved or to attract “nut cases?”
And no, “they” cannot protest anywhere they want. Or do you mean like on interstate highways during rush hour?
I obviously meant anywhere they are legally allowed to do so. But sure, we'll go with your "literal take as snappy rebuttal attempt".
In front of residences on public property is legally allowed. How do you square that? Literally?
Nope. I can look at each event and decide what level of outrage, if any, is required for each. I don't need to compare to decide.
How am I falling for something when I'm of the same opinion on this matter as I would have been 20 years ago?
Frankly, I'm not outraged at the protests at the homes. I merely stated that I didn't think it was appropriate. It makes me mildly uncomfortable, if you will. Now, showing up at a ledge with ar-15's in tow? yeah, that's quite concerning. that's another level of intimidation unto itself.
Your slippery slope concern isn't valid. They can protest wherever they want. I just have a line, and that line is personal residences. It's a lower level of intimidation that has the potential for escalation. When you involve a person's residence, you are potentially involving people that have no business being involved; the justices' children, families, staff, friends, what have you. That's my issue.
Because I don’t recall your “outrage”, your term not mine, at any other manner of protest, whether it was God hates fags at military funerals, the daily clinic protests and “intimidation” that occurs, the shouting down of school committee meetings and candidate forums or armed protesters occupying state houses. But peaceful protest outside a SCOTUS residence, or in mrussel’s case, any residence, crosses a line. Okay, weird.
Doesn’t any protest have the potential to involve people that have no business being involved or to attract “nut cases?”
And no, “they” cannot protest anywhere they want. Or do you mean like on interstate highways during rush hour?
not every thought I have ever had is put in print here on this website.
Comments
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
And thus far, “the left is not stooping to the right’s level.” Not even close.
I can’t believe you guys are falling for this after what we’ve witnessed over the past almost 6-7 years. The left continues to be demonized for doth protesting too much and the needle indicating what’s normal, acceptable or how it should be continues to move to the right. You’re going to wake up one day and wonder what the fuck happened to the US.
”The SCOTUS leak is a greater threat to our democracy than 1/6.” That wee little peaceful protest at the Capitol? Meh.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
www.headstonesband.com
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
IMHO you are falling for it. You’re seemingly not seeing the effect of comparing what one side does, regularly, and what the other not so bad side does and either equating them, saying they’re both wrong or that they’re both unethical. Your attitude, thought process or complacency, for lack of a better word or descriptor, is exactly the desired effect. Pretty soon the only “safe spaces” for peaceful protest will be in designated pens far removed from the object of protest. Like the 2004 Repub National Convention. Unless you’re white, Christian and armed. Then everything and everywhere is fair game.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
How am I falling for something when I'm of the same opinion on this matter as I would have been 20 years ago?
Frankly, I'm not outraged at the protests at the homes. I merely stated that I didn't think it was appropriate. It makes me mildly uncomfortable, if you will. Now, showing up at a ledge with ar-15's in tow? yeah, that's quite concerning. that's another level of intimidation unto itself.
Your slippery slope concern isn't valid. They can protest wherever they want. I just have a line, and that line is personal residences. It's a lower level of intimidation that has the potential for escalation. When you involve a person's residence, you are potentially involving people that have no business being involved; the justices' children, families, staff, friends, what have you. That's my issue.
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
I have a slightly different take. We don't vote for the Justices. They do not answer to us. They can go thru their entire lives never appearing in public or answering questions to us, to the media, to anybody.
Quite frankly, I'm surprised they live on residential streets and not in a private compound. I'm sure that's about to change, and the public will have zero ability for them to hear us. Of course this is enhanced by their lifetime appointments.
SCOTUS said the right to protest can not even be buffered by a 35 foot zone. Well, if anyone ever deserved to suffer from their own bad decisions, Its this Court
Funny that other posters have posted similar situations, just that they weren’t SCOTUS, and there have been a bunch of others to make the news and nary a peep about protesting in front of residences. Guess SCOTUS is special?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Doesn’t any protest have the potential to involve people that have no business being involved or to attract “nut cases?”
And no, “they” cannot protest anywhere they want. Or do you mean like on interstate highways during rush hour?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
What makes peaceful protest outside of any residence unacceptable to you? Should it be restricted or illegal? To peacefully protest outside any residence?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
weird, I know.
www.headstonesband.com
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
www.headstonesband.com
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©