• obvs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    12 hours ago

    The U.S. Government never passes up an opportunity to declare people to be property.

    Children are not property. Children are people.

    The exact same logic that adults can speak toward children in ways that are abusive because those adults are legally allowed to speak is exactly the logic that would say that adults can sexually abuse children because those adults are legally allowed to have sex.

    No. When your actions have victims, you are violating those victims’ rights.

    And that is true REGARDLESS of what this court of “justices” claims.

    The people on this court don’t even know what the word “justice” means, and they have no business being called it.

  • wheezy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    “Free Speech” is not a thing. It’s a cute little idea. But even in the most ideal “Liberal” (capital L) utopia speech will always have restrictions.

    It’s like saying “Freedom of Movement” covers your ability to swing your arm around regardless of who’s “face” happens to be in the way.

    The lie of “Freedom of Speech” is a privilege of a stable system of governance that is not threatened. Speech is allowed to spread freely and even question those systems as long as those systems are not threatened (Neoliberal capitalism in recent history). But in times of conflict and worsening conditions it will always be used to protect the systems that have power as they become more oppressive.

    It is why we use to look down at places like Cuba and scream "they suppress the newspapers!

    Yes, they do. Because their system that refuses to allow outside capital to influence their country IS under threat. It’s had a blockade of trade for decades. It’s an actual threat. And so, in the same way, “Free Speech” is suppressed.

    Because the idea of free speech is just that, an idea. It’s not something that exists in reality.

  • RedWeasel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    Interestingly I won’t be surprised when this specific ruling is used to protect trans rights. A double edge sword if you will.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Interestingly I won’t be surprised when this specific ruling is used to protect trans rights

      What?

      How is medical professionals being able to tell patients false and misleading information going to be used to support trans rights?

      • RedWeasel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        They also can’t be forced to lie or provide false and misleading information as well. The ruling even mentions the American Psychiatric Association calling homosexuality a mental disorder as a case where the AMA was wrong. It could end up being very interesting in how lower courts interpret this in the future in cases blocking trans care bans.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          It’s just about words…

          Not actually treatements

          But that’s not even getting into how crazy expecting logical consistency or fair enforcement is…