Re: Jersey City Residents Decry Offensive Murals Commissioned by the City
Posted by CatDog on 2017/5/10 15:21:44
What hyprocrites, people say no censorship but there is censorship with the ban on chain stores downtown. Why is one fine but not the other?
To point out the obvious, one (art) is protected by the first amendment. The other (stores) is not.
Funny, how liberals ignore the First Amendment on other matters like the florists and bakers who do not want to cater a same sex wedding. Religion falls under the First Amendment before speech , assembly, etc. Returning to the subject, it is still mediocre art.
The law isn't stopping you from being a Catholic. It's just stopping you from treating other people like subhumans. Your arguments are identical to the ones made against interracial marriage, desegregation, and abolition, fyi.
Your concern trolling about the Constitution would make a lot more sense if you had the vaguest understanding of how it works, and if you weren't constantly harping on about nonsense like tiger murals scaring awful drivers.
This Post was from: http://jclist.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=421456