Amy Coney Barrett Forgets Right To Protest Is A First Amendment Freedom

tz620q said:

I think you are making a lot of assumptions about my beliefs that I have not stated. I don't agree with the handling of the protesters in D.C.

Click to expand...

Fair enough.

I was merely stating why they would need to move to allow the President to travel where ever he wanted and that unfortunately for a President that includes a rather large buffer zone.

Click to expand...

The why of it certainly makes sense from a logistical standpoint. The issue is that the president doesn't have the right to travel wherever he wants if doing so involves violating the civil rights of other people. He's still an agent of the government and bound by the constitution.

I would hope you would have the same expectation if you came out of your house and found people trying to block your egress.

Click to expand...

They weren't blocking his egress from the White House. They were blocking a specific path that he chose. If there's a crowd next door to my house, I don't get to push and shove people out of my way so that I can go to the house on the other side of the crowd.

RestoreTheJoy said:

Let's question you on legal process for 11 hours one day and several hours the next, and see how you do. Oh, and make sure you take care of your seven kids when you aren't being questioned. The woman is a walking legal encyclopedia of the Constitution, most of the main cases, and lots of statutes and canons, but she is a human being. For a brief moment, she forgot 1 of 5 rights mentioned in the First Amendment.

Click to expand...

Good golly! 7 children? You are correct! Forget about this unnecessary questioning and witch-hunt. She needs to withdraw her nomination and take care of her growing family and be a good mother like the Bible commands and forget about all this Supreme Court nonsense, there just isn’t enough time.

Aryeh Jay said:

Good golly! 7 children? You are correct! Forget about this unnecessary questioning and witch-hunt. She needs to withdraw her nomination and take care of her growing family and be a good mother like the Bible commands and forget about all this Supreme Court nonsense, there just isn’t enough time.

Click to expand...

I know you're joking, but this is relevant:
Opinion | Why Only Amy Coney Barrett Gets to Have It All

AvilaSurfer said:

She’ll match wits with you anytime.

Click to expand...

Ok. How about now?

RestoreTheJoy said:

Let's question you on legal process for 11 hours one day and several hours the next, and see how you do. Oh, and make sure you take care of your seven kids when you aren't being questioned. The woman is a walking legal encyclopedia of the Constitution, most of the main cases, and lots of statutes and canons, but she is a human being. For a brief moment, she forgot 1 of 5 rights mentioned in the First Amendment.

Click to expand...

Are you serious? She is a Supreme Court candidate. Her gender, number of kids, and religion has nothing to do with it (hopefully). If she doesn't know the First Amendment totally -- the basis of human rights in this country -- that is a problem.

I'm certain she will be confirmed, however. Trump could have nominated a partisan monkey and the Republicans in the would confirm it.

tz620q said:

I think you are making a lot of assumptions about my beliefs that I have not stated. I don't agree with the handling of the protesters in D.C. I was merely stating why they would need to move to allow the President to travel where ever he wanted and that unfortunately for a President that includes a rather large buffer zone. I would hope you would have the same expectation if you came out of your house and found people trying to block your egress.

Click to expand...

Of course you could always summon the police to use tear gas and flash/bang bombs to remove them so you could have a photo-op in front of a church (without the pastor's knowledge or permission) holding up a Bible that you don't ever read.

ArmenianJohn said:

You can't - I don't get into any kind of competition with those who are unequipped.

Click to expand...

Reading comprehension not a strength for you?

ArmenianJohn said:

So she's ignorant and not suitable to be a judge on the highest court in the land because she doesn't know (or doesn't care about) the absolute basics.

Click to expand...

LOLOL

Nominee Judge Barrett Asked to Reveal Her Reference ...

ArmenianJohn said:

Comprehension is great, eyes not so much. Statement still stands as an all-inclusive, plural "You".

Click to expand...

Still makes no sense. I’ll just chalk it up to ESL.

You know how much it pains me to sound like a Trump supporter, but this is much ado about nothing. One of the things human beings do is to "block" when anxious or under stress. Have you never had someone ask you something you know very well and temporarily block your memory and not be able to come up with that thing you know very well? I can't imagine how stressful it must be to be in the spotlight and subject of a senate hearing. Maybe she didn't know it or maybe she blocked. Who knows? I have to give her a pass on this one.

iluvatar5150 said:

While I'm reluctant to read too much into things like this (e.g. Rick Perry's being unable to remember the name of the Energy Dept), it's quite clear that Republicans are okay with letting the protesting rights fall by the wayside - or at least for those who'd exercise those rights in pursuit of things Republicans don't like.

Click to expand...

The word protest doesn't actually appear in the first amendment anywhere...

It's implied, but so are a lot of things.