No right is unlimited. People should not place words or images in public view, especially where children are likely to be exposed to them, which are obscene, indecent, or profane. We have federal laws, in accordance with Supreme Court rulings, that prohibit these things on public airwaves:
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/obscene-indecent-and-profane-broadcasts
Why can’t similar standards be applied to images and messages displayed in public places?
>
No right is unlimited. People should not place words or images in public view, especially where children are likely to be exposed to them, which are obscene, indecent, or profane. We have federal laws, in accordance with Supreme Court rulings, that prohibit these things on public airwaves:
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/obscene-indecent-and-profane-broadcasts
Why can’t similar standards be applied to images and messages displayed in public places?
>
IMO, incorrect. ALL Rights are UNLIMITED; it’s the repercussions one has to account for (IE: the fallacy of ‘not screaming FIRE’...if a fire, *NOT* a problem).
2nd, we *all* know just how “grand” SCOTUS ruling can be *SMH* We already know how “shall not be infringed” has fallen fall victim vs. your prior point.
Please, define “obscene, indecent, a/o profane”, considering. Just as this thread points out, it’s arbitrary to the individual.
Prob. is leaving ‘standards’ up to GOVT, when it fails to follow the Law(s) itself.
“Why can’t similar standards be applied to images and messages displayed in public places”
Because CA and MA would arrest people for obscene “MAGA” hats.
Absurd you say? Kids have been expelled from achool for Trump clothing ina manner that was clearly an abuse of power.
Look what Twitter and Facebook do to conservatives where there is no first amendment protection.
Liberals are tyrants. They abuse any power given them. Hence why there must be bright line, no discretion rules. They can’t handle anything.
And hence why this was a bad arrest.