this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2025
1770 points (97.7% liked)

Science Memes

12654 readers
3801 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
1770
fuck this (mander.xyz)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -4 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, it is.

That’s why all the Westborough Baptist people can stand around with God hates fags signs and nothing happens to them

[–] [email protected] 4 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

The court only ruled on offensive or outrageous speech...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

When? Brandenburg V Ohio long predates them

[–] [email protected] 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I thought you were replying to me at first, but it just reaffirm what I said so now it looks like you were replying to someone else maybe

The ruling reaffirmed that the government cannot punish speech just because it is offensive or upsetting, reinforcing strong protections for free speech under the First Amendment.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 17 hours ago

Nope, I was definitely replying to you. The court decided there's a subtle difference and that their "God hates fags" signs skirt hate speech laws quite well within the US legal framework. And I unfortunately agree as a gay atheist.

it just reaffirm what I said

Hold on. The fact that they went to trial over it and that there was litigation of the particular use of language is indication that not all speech is free speech and that careful consideration of where that line is was required. If their signs had been different this ruling would've also been quite different based on the same premise.