Message from NDO Nick-TX in Front And Center #general

2017-10-29 19:50:29 UTC  

Effortposting on Gab

2017-10-29 19:53:06 UTC  

I thought we only got a 30 day postban on Facebook, but it turns out our page was 100% unpublished. I really, really dislike mainstream social media platforms.

2017-10-29 19:56:46 UTC

This bottom feeding reporter contacted us last week for an article on Newsweek, we ignored him entirely, I don't regret it considering now he's trying to dox some random White guys, looks like.

2017-10-29 20:25:18 UTC

2017-10-29 20:43:18 UTC  

I like those. Those are good.

2017-10-29 21:32:00 UTC  

I like the second one, but yeah, all good

2017-10-29 22:15:05 UTC we are reaching soy boy levels previously thought impossible 😆

2017-10-29 23:24:06 UTC  

@Thomas Ryan , what do you think of the Bill of Rights? I think it is excellent, if only we redefine citizenship.

2017-10-29 23:32:01 UTC  

You go back and forth about what roles the states have, but folks have been doing that for centuries. No real glaring flaws to the bill of rights, it wasn't the point of failure for the State.

2017-10-29 23:35:07 UTC  

Sorry but I have to countersignal the bill of rights - well, mainly the first amendment

2017-10-29 23:35:18 UTC  

Go ahead

2017-10-29 23:36:23 UTC  

The state must not refuse to define the Good - which is basically the point of the 1st amendment

2017-10-29 23:38:07 UTC  

The truth will not necessarily win out in a free market of ideas

2017-10-29 23:38:34 UTC  

Would it not be that the State cannor enforce it's own definition of good? In our current society, the State's definition of good and just is not shared by us.

2017-10-29 23:39:01 UTC  

Keep in mind their idea of all men were men of European descent of good character. They never envisioned muds being considered our equals

2017-10-29 23:39:46 UTC  

And as far as enforcing morality, it can be done without making dissenting speech illegal. We would be massive hyporcrites to not understand the value of free speech while dangling on the edge of being thrown into prison if it loses ground in this country.

2017-10-29 23:40:23 UTC  

It would be like us writing a founding document and being expected to take into account space aliens being included 200 years later

2017-10-29 23:41:04 UTC  

Definitely going to have a "gas the xenos, galactic Manifest Destiny now" clause.

2017-10-29 23:41:43 UTC  

Seriously that's how foreign a concept of other races being "American" would have been to them

2017-10-29 23:41:55 UTC  

The state has a duty to keep morally deleterious ideas out of public consumption. This is fundamental

2017-10-29 23:42:21 UTC  

I’m not only talking about obscenity although that’s obvious

2017-10-29 23:42:40 UTC  

And obscenity was never considered speech until the 60s

2017-10-29 23:42:48 UTC  

That's why Fascism is the only way forward

2017-10-29 23:43:08 UTC  

However even dangerous ideas presented in a morally acceptable manner must be scrutinized

2017-10-29 23:43:09 UTC  

The point of the 1st amendment is speech and religion, should Christianity be enforced in your opinion?

2017-10-29 23:43:56 UTC  

I believe in toleration not religious liberty. The difference is important.

2017-10-29 23:44:13 UTC  

Yes. It should be the official state religion with other European religions tolerated

2017-10-29 23:44:34 UTC  

Mosley wrote about how he was fine with any religions that did not preach subversion of the State, and welcomed those that promoted duty and fairness. Foreign religions could be given a different status, but as far as homogeneity, that would be a followup of that.

2017-10-29 23:44:39 UTC  

Religious liberty is a deleterious principal. Toleration is often a necessity

2017-10-29 23:44:58 UTC  

Define the difference in your opinion

2017-10-29 23:45:06 UTC  

No Islam, Judaism or any culturally foreign religions not tolerated

2017-10-29 23:46:10 UTC  

That's easy to say, but hard to make precedents of, and what faiths to include in what cultural categories are also not as black and white.

2017-10-29 23:47:00 UTC  

We make it very clear which religions are acceptable and they will naturally stay away

2017-10-29 23:47:15 UTC  

Religious liberty is a refusal of the state to make certain claims about the truth

2017-10-29 23:48:07 UTC  

Toleration is necessary in societies which are in any degree mixed

2017-10-29 23:48:26 UTC  

Politically, religiously, even ethnically

2017-10-29 23:48:29 UTC  

So Thomas, if a communist were to ask me, "Would you make my speech illegal?"
I should then respond, "No, but I will remove the causal factors leading you to become a communist."

2017-10-29 23:49:30 UTC  

The truth as far as morality or religion? Is it possible the State can define the truth about family, lifestyle, and duty without defining what faith most accurately worships Christ or gets the creation right?

2017-10-29 23:50:47 UTC  

@Smiter-IL I believe the State has every right to make actions illegal. Where the line is drawn between speech and action is something to be defined.