Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 499288267384946694
Also France and Canada technically have free speech but not in the same way as the US
They just have it because they’re granted by the government
The bill of rights cannot be infringed upon
In France and the UK and Canada, you only have freedom of speech because you assume the government is benevolent enough to let you keep it, but they can (and do) take it away at any time
One of the biggest reasons the US has this level of freedom is because of how easy it is for citizens to participate in legislatures via state government
I’ll be a minute, we just got a shipment of rocks and other junk for the driveway
*another minute, I just finished eating
Phuket
Fucket?
PHUKET ROYAL
I’m gonna be as minimalistic about this because I honestly just want to play PUBG Mobile at this point
>free speech on paper
I don’t disagree that our free speech is technically not free speech, in fact I myself have described it as “free speech, *conditions apply”
>Quebec underrepresented
Fair enough, as of recently, Quebec is having trouble with having its voice heard on Canadian policies, but Quebec has always had a fragile relationship with the rest of Canada.as near as I can tell, any time they were heard by the government, they wanted absolutely everything to be overhauled and tailored to their needs and wants. In law class, I specifically remember that there was a controversy during or just after the Cold War that Quebec wanted to stop putting English on their road signs and shops. Canada has required since that road signs at the very least have the two official languages of Canada on them regardless of the province. There inlies the problem; Quebec in its current form is treated like any other province as it should be in an egalitarian society, however if Quebec had it’s way, they would be a sovereign nation that recieved the benefits of being a Canadian province. As I view it, you can’t have your cake and eat it too.
>not necessarily free speech
Again, fair enough, I just use free speech because it’s one of the biggest staples of an open society. If you can say what you want and not get shot in the street by the Government for example, that to me would be the biggest indicator that a state was not authoritarian.
>roads
I agree that they’re the least of a state’s problems, but if there’s a federal system that is supposed to control the big things like immigration, and the states control the small things like roads, but if the state system wants to fulfil its purpose more effectively, I think it should be the other way around; the local populous should be deciding the bigger issues rather than road laws and the feds should look at the cracks in the road.
>free speech not the same
I also agree.
>bill of rights
As it should be
>government not as benevolent with free speech
Agreed, Canada and the UK have arrested people for saying things that should fall under free speech as free speech should be known: free.
>state government brought about freedom
This is the one I disagree with; the freedom was brought about through colony heads writing a document to stand in direct defiance of the British occupation and oppressions. I remember my father watched John Addams and that the head of New York was against the revolution because of the British fleets just inside firing range of the shoreline. That kind of thing would have had to be taken into consideration regardless of whether or not they asked New York what they wanted; it is the nature of warfare and in a revolution, warfare is necessary.
I HAD TO SPLIT THAT UP
BECAUSE I WENT OVER THE CHARACTER LIMIT
FUCK
um no the electoral college is extremely useful as it stops high population states like California and nsot of the north from dominating elections. the state by state laws are supposed to be to stop the government from deciding ultimate law so you could just move to s different state I honestly think many things should be nationalized such as stand your ground and no license required for purchasing guns. oh for sure for such a long time the Republicans were bought out(we call them rhinos) but trumps a populist and his own party hates his guts. they avidly work against him as fo the Democrats. any criticism towards trump not "doing enough" can just as easily put down by that fact.
Feck off I’m done
It’s not 2016 anymore, I’m supposed to be done losing fingers in meme wars
its 2018 and we keep winning 😎<:mlgdoge:280634772307443714>
me being positive about the future when it likely won't get better ^
You didn’t win, I refused to argue you.
Difference.
Incidentally...
The electoral college for a federal election should simply be removed as a system. A federal election for a position such as President should not weigh the votes of one group of citizens above another. If it does, then it’s nor a vote of 52 states, it’s a vote of 13 colonies. You haven’t had 13 colonies for decades if not centuries.
A federal election to decide who controls the federal government should weigh each citizen within that federal elections’s boundaries equally. Let the states do their own election to decide their local government later.
And please, for the love of Christ Almighty, do not use emojis unironically. It’s cringey, it’s dumb, it hurts my soul, stop it.
All it does is accomplish the same thing those politically aware raps do; they tell people you’re trying desperately to be hip and cool.
You aren’t, especially if you think doge is still relevant.
Fucking
Yeet
Shut the fuck up necro
@Local Doomguy I didn't mean state governments brought about freedom, I meant state governments enable freedom by making it easier to self govern
Ahhhh, I see.
Sorry for the misconception. If I’d realized that’s what you meant, I’d have brought up our provinces, it still enables a federal system, but still gives the government an idea of what their limits are.
So
How about that airline food?
*laugh track laighb teack laught rack*
You like that Jerry Seinfeld?
***Excuse me***
@Johnny Ishigami THANK YOU
❤
❤ YW