A blog about Arts & Entertainment, Health & Wellness, and Kern County.
Real Name: Bruce Thiessen Member Since: July 29, 2006 Last Signed In: September 05, 2008 Profile Views: 14738 Blog Views: 83875 Eager to dig for dirt, democrats will find themselves "Digging a hole to Nowhere" Some liberals treat McCain like soldiers were treated when they first came back from Viet Nam She hit it "Out of the Ballpark and then some!": New song about Palin convention speech Holdin' on for Dear Life: Pro-life song in defense of Palin and her daughter Obama's followers disrespect him by ignoring his admonishment One September Mournin': New song to be added to ever-expanding 9/11 retrospective CD A Couple of Mavericks: Listen to the new song and keep an eye on the winning ticket If I were McCain, I'd be proud to be associated with President Bush: He's a great President! Carter denegrates McCain's military service: Alt rock song asks Jimmy Carter: Do you have a soul? Promises made in the Parking Lot at Trout's: Hear/review new Krock (Kern Country country rock) song August 06 September 06 October 06 November 06 December 06 January 07 February 07 March 07 April 07 May 07 June 07 July 07 August 07 September 07 October 07 November 07 December 07 January 08 February 08 March 08 April 08 May 08 June 08 July 08 August 08 September 08 http://www.drblt.net 
RSS 2.0    Share!
|
|
|
Bong Hits 4 Jesus: "High" court gongs "bong"/just says no to student's free speech rights
You've likely already read the latest news on the Bong Hits 4 Jesus free speech case. If not, here's a way to get up to "speed": http://www.mtv.com/news/art... But though the court ruled against the student who displayed the sign with the "infamous" line, the song has not yet been banned. And you can download it for free before it becomes a big "hit" right here, right now: http://www.drblt.net/music/... And, in the spirit of blog n roll, my newly established form of dual-media expression, you'll have your opportunity to respond to the court ruling in the comments section. Do I think this is cause for conservatives to celebrate? Uhh, no! This is a blow to all of us. But that's just my opinion. Let me hear yours.
20 comments from 10 users
1
posted by
randomfactor
on Jun 28, 2007 at 09:55 AM
Damned activist judges.
posted by
Hardliner4freedom
on Jun 28, 2007 at 09:59 AM
As a great b.com blogger tires of saying, "I told you so." What I warn of here -- http://people.bakersfield.c... -- is coming home to roost.
posted by
blognroll
on Jun 28, 2007 at 09:59 AM
Damned right!
posted by
tempinsane
on Jun 28, 2007 at 10:21 AM
No, just show sanity is coming back to courts after 50 years of secular progressive lunacy. Hopefully the trend will continue and the liberal left will realize they are the Small minority.
posted by
randomfactor
on Jun 28, 2007 at 10:23 AM
Yeah, that 70 percent is very Small indeed.
posted by
sfinboston52
on Jun 28, 2007 at 10:29 AM
WTF - this court is now destorying the 1st admin.
posted by
randomfactor
on Jun 28, 2007 at 10:31 AM
You expected different? Bush *WANTED* activist judges.
posted by
mattloch
on Jun 28, 2007 at 10:42 AM
Actually sf, they upheld "free speech" (if you consider piles of money "free") and religion (if you consider giving government money to religious groups "religious") in their other decisions. So the 1st Amendment is taken care of.As long as you don't consider controversial speech "protected". Yup. The 1st is there to protect popular speech, or the rich. Thank you "strict constructionists". posted by
robbwillis
on Jun 28, 2007 at 10:50 AM
Roberts focused on the banner being an advocacy for drugs. At least he has an imagination. Someone wrote a letter to O'Reilly saying it was good to see the ACLU on Jesus' side for a change. Lol! posted by
mattloch
on Jun 28, 2007 at 10:54 AM
I guess Roberts would have been ok with it if the student had added this to the bottom:*water pipes are for tobacco use only. posted by
Hardliner4freedom
on Jun 28, 2007 at 10:56 AM
Wasn't just the ACLU. The Religious Right's legal group, American Center for Law and Justice, also supported the student's rights: http://www.aclj.org/news/Re... Of course, that throws Bakodon's bigotry here out the window, but the ACLJ got this one right.
posted by
randomfactor
on Jun 28, 2007 at 10:59 AM
Oddly enough, the banner would probably have been OK if it had said "LEGALIZE Bong Hits 4 Jesus."
posted by
ProgressivePete2
on Jun 28, 2007 at 11:09 AM
I think the main issue with the court is that it was promoting "illegal drug use" so I doubt putting legalize would change the ruling. I guess the students will have to spell bong backwards next time.
posted by
mattloch
on Jun 28, 2007 at 11:15 AM
Would SCOTUS have decided differently if the sign said "BLOW JOBS FOR JESUS"?Anyone care to find out? posted by
redkernhero
on Jun 28, 2007 at 11:16 AM
Where have you been, this is America and anti-drug issues trump free speech issues every time. Free speech will never be the problem drugs are, drugs kill, free speech just makes shut up!
posted by
randomfactor
on Jun 28, 2007 at 11:17 AM
Well, mattloch, that might have made it an interstate commerce issue...
posted by
ProgressivePete2
on Jun 28, 2007 at 11:40 AM
The case never would have made it to the SCOTUS if it were BJ's
posted by
CassandraMcGowan
on Jun 28, 2007 at 12:06 PM
how did the judge and jury know that the kid was talking about smoking pot out of the bong since bongs are -intended for tobacco use only- hardy har. yeah right, who the heck smokes tobacco out of a bong? but yeah i think it's pretty lame the kid got in trouble for that, i remember commenting on this subject a few months ago and i think it was ridiculous then and i think it is now. the constitution now has so many limits that aren't supposed to be there it's absurd. posted by
robbwillis
on Jun 28, 2007 at 12:07 PM
What jury?
posted by
randomfactor
on Jun 28, 2007 at 12:07 PM
Jucicial Activist Telepathy.
1
Our readers recommend: |
