-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
The Insane "Social Justice" Thread pt IV
- Thread starter Bill of Rights
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
- Status
Hose filled with lead shot.
President Of LGBTQ Advocate Group Says Women Should ‘Learn To Lose Gracefully’ To Trans Competitors
The president of the National Women’s Law Center said that women should “learn to lose gracefully” to transsexual competitors during testimony Tuesday.
dailycaller.com
Those that call themselves 'tolerant'... aren't.
Those that say they will protect women's rights... don't.
Those that say they will protect women's rights... don't.
We need more pushback like this.
Gaines proceeded to slam Lee stating in a bold retort:
Rule XVII, clause 1(b) prohibits Members from engaging in “personalities.” That is a rule cited to the Speaker or chair to bar personal attacks from other members that are deemed unparliamentary. There is no definition of what words are considered to be violative of the rule.
However, Lee was attempting to use this against a witness who was defending herself against her own personal attack. It is a dangerous extension. Members of Congress generally are protected under the “speech or debate” clause in Article I, Section 6, of the Constitution. The privilege protects legislative proceedings and generally does not apply to news releases, speeches and other public comments. This was the holding in Hutchinson v. Proxmire, when Sen. Proxmire was found to be acting outside of the clause in making media comments regarding his golden fleece award.
Members often knowingly make defamatory comments in congressional debates, but then decline to repeat those same words in public to avoid any legal accountability. I faced that tactic in representing Dr. Eric Foretich in the Elizabeth Morgan controversy. Members would say false and defamatory claims about my client on the floor, but would carefully avoid repeating those claims in interviews. My challenge to the Elizabeth Morgan Act took years before it was struck down as an unconstitutional Bill of Attainder. However, we could not bring a defamation action due to members using the Speech and Debate Clause as a shield.
That would create a nightmarish combination if members are protected from actions in defaming witnesses but then can censor them when they defend themselves.
The fact that Lee’s immediate response was to censor a person who she had just attacked is telling.
After labeling Gaines a hateful bigot, Lee did not believe that she should be allowed to denounce Lee’s own comments as an attack on women.
It shows the slippery slope of censorship.
Democrats have embraced an anti-free speech agenda to silence opposing viewpoints. That desire becomes insatiable even as citizens seek to rebut personal attacks from members in a congressional hearing.
www.zerohedge.com
Gaines proceeded to slam Lee stating in a bold retort:
Lee then pounced and demanded that Gaines’ remarks be struck for “engaging in personalities” rather than the substance of the debate:
As Jonathan Turley details, what followed was hurried consultation and presumably a few explanations for Lee on why witnesses are allowed to respond to such attacks by a member.
Rule XVII, clause 1(b) prohibits Members from engaging in “personalities.” That is a rule cited to the Speaker or chair to bar personal attacks from other members that are deemed unparliamentary. There is no definition of what words are considered to be violative of the rule.
However, Lee was attempting to use this against a witness who was defending herself against her own personal attack. It is a dangerous extension. Members of Congress generally are protected under the “speech or debate” clause in Article I, Section 6, of the Constitution. The privilege protects legislative proceedings and generally does not apply to news releases, speeches and other public comments. This was the holding in Hutchinson v. Proxmire, when Sen. Proxmire was found to be acting outside of the clause in making media comments regarding his golden fleece award.
Members often knowingly make defamatory comments in congressional debates, but then decline to repeat those same words in public to avoid any legal accountability. I faced that tactic in representing Dr. Eric Foretich in the Elizabeth Morgan controversy. Members would say false and defamatory claims about my client on the floor, but would carefully avoid repeating those claims in interviews. My challenge to the Elizabeth Morgan Act took years before it was struck down as an unconstitutional Bill of Attainder. However, we could not bring a defamation action due to members using the Speech and Debate Clause as a shield.
That would create a nightmarish combination if members are protected from actions in defaming witnesses but then can censor them when they defend themselves.
The fact that Lee’s immediate response was to censor a person who she had just attacked is telling.
After labeling Gaines a hateful bigot, Lee did not believe that she should be allowed to denounce Lee’s own comments as an attack on women.
It shows the slippery slope of censorship.
Democrats have embraced an anti-free speech agenda to silence opposing viewpoints. That desire becomes insatiable even as citizens seek to rebut personal attacks from members in a congressional hearing.
Riley Gaines Wrecks "Misogynist" 'Squad' Member After Being Called 'Hateful, Transphobic' | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
FTFY
I saw that exchange. Gaines don’t **** around.We need more pushback like this.
Gaines proceeded to slam Lee stating in a bold retort:
Lee then pounced and demanded that Gaines’ remarks be struck for “engaging in personalities” rather than the substance of the debate:
As Jonathan Turley details, what followed was hurried consultation and presumably a few explanations for Lee on why witnesses are allowed to respond to such attacks by a member.
Rule XVII, clause 1(b) prohibits Members from engaging in “personalities.” That is a rule cited to the Speaker or chair to bar personal attacks from other members that are deemed unparliamentary. There is no definition of what words are considered to be violative of the rule.
However, Lee was attempting to use this against a witness who was defending herself against her own personal attack. It is a dangerous extension. Members of Congress generally are protected under the “speech or debate” clause in Article I, Section 6, of the Constitution. The privilege protects legislative proceedings and generally does not apply to news releases, speeches and other public comments. This was the holding in Hutchinson v. Proxmire, when Sen. Proxmire was found to be acting outside of the clause in making media comments regarding his golden fleece award.
Members often knowingly make defamatory comments in congressional debates, but then decline to repeat those same words in public to avoid any legal accountability. I faced that tactic in representing Dr. Eric Foretich in the Elizabeth Morgan controversy. Members would say false and defamatory claims about my client on the floor, but would carefully avoid repeating those claims in interviews. My challenge to the Elizabeth Morgan Act took years before it was struck down as an unconstitutional Bill of Attainder. However, we could not bring a defamation action due to members using the Speech and Debate Clause as a shield.
That would create a nightmarish combination if members are protected from actions in defaming witnesses but then can censor them when they defend themselves.
The fact that Lee’s immediate response was to censor a person who she had just attacked is telling.
After labeling Gaines a hateful bigot, Lee did not believe that she should be allowed to denounce Lee’s own comments as an attack on women.
It shows the slippery slope of censorship.
Democrats have embraced an anti-free speech agenda to silence opposing viewpoints. That desire becomes insatiable even as citizens seek to rebut personal attacks from members in a congressional hearing.
Riley Gaines Wrecks "Misogynist" 'Squad' Member After Being Called 'Hateful, Transphobic' | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
Time to start dishing it back.
Most of their 'arguments' can be thrown right back at them.
"you're offending me"..
okay. And you're offending me.
A health sciences program offered at The Ohio State University requires those who sign up for the course to take part in an array of discussions and assignments about gender and race, including one that asks students to address their privileges if they are White, heterosexual or able-bodied.
Yep,we live in clown world.
Have a fellow employee going to IUPUI or whatever the **** it's called, with the same requirement.
spencer rifle
Grandmaster
As an alumnus, I would immediately cut them off from any future donations, except they already ****** me off years ago and never get anything from me. Now they've given me another reason.
Amazon product ASIN B0B35RFR52Wait... We have a straight flag?
I mean, I go to all the straight meetings. I read the straight newsletters. How was I NOT made aware of this?
Chinese children are working overtime to make these....get yours......um...yea.
I may get our new Calendar though.
Anti-Woke Beer Company Rivals Bud Light Launching 'Real Women' Calendar Designed To 'Serve As A Reminder: Men Can Never Replace The Beautiful Women Of America'
The brewing industry, which traditionally focused on themes of patriotism, sports and classic Americana, recently has witnessed a cultural and marketing shift with Bud Light's recent foray into more progressive advertising by featuring transgender activist Dylan Mulvaney. The campaign stirred...
Conservative Dad's Real Women of America 2024 Calendar
HOTTEST CHRISTMAS GIFT FOR CONSERVATIVES IN 2024! LIMITED SUPPLY. ORDER NOW TO RECEIVE BY CHRISTMAS! Conservative Dad's Real Women of America Calendar is a celebration of conservative women who are fighting woke extremist to preserve real women. 10% of sales will be donated to the Riley Gaines...
ultrarightbeer.com
Last edited:
If my kids weren't already out of school I would ask them to answer the question about white privilege honestly.
As white I am expected to act civilized In public.
As white I am expected to work hard for everything I get.
As white I actually pay for everything rather than stealing it off the shelves.
As white I am expected to have a job.
As white I am expected to pay my taxes to support others who do not.
As white I am expected to support my wife and children.
As white I am expected to maintain my house in the neighborhood.
As white I am expected to live my life within the law.
As white I am expected to treat Law Enforcement Officers with respect.
As white I am expected to operate in a dignified manner.
These are the white privileges I was given to uphold. That is the "privilege" I was given, rather than a sense of victimhood.
As white I am expected to act civilized In public.
As white I am expected to work hard for everything I get.
As white I actually pay for everything rather than stealing it off the shelves.
As white I am expected to have a job.
As white I am expected to pay my taxes to support others who do not.
As white I am expected to support my wife and children.
As white I am expected to maintain my house in the neighborhood.
As white I am expected to live my life within the law.
As white I am expected to treat Law Enforcement Officers with respect.
As white I am expected to operate in a dignified manner.
These are the white privileges I was given to uphold. That is the "privilege" I was given, rather than a sense of victimhood.
Last edited:
You snoozeWait... We have a straight flag?
I mean, I go to all the straight meetings. I read the straight newsletters. How was I NOT made aware of this?
You lose.
Stupid **** *****. Sooner or later there will be a reckoning of all these sick moronic pieces of ****.
- Status
Site Supporter
Members online
- Ark
- Leadeye
- Jerry downey
- CheeseRat
- Ingomike
- mongo404
- mcoppers
- Keith_Indy
- slims2002
- Mark-DuCo
- DoggyDaddy
- dowalker
- bigretic
- target64
- Brad69
- DestructionDan
- Calvin
- bwframe
- skydelta34
- NyleRN
- rhslover
- sportsman223
- INgunowner
- Doug
- DCAUDILL24
- sadclownwp
- ditcherman
- 85Cosmo
- Johnk
- teddy12b
- renauldo
- DEAIV
- Gypsy31
- L C H
- Bobby
- Jmtbug21
- Jeffforpresident
- indiucky
- derrickgoins
- Robert Richardson
- SnoopLoggyDog
- tankerjoe
- rhamersley
- edwea
- joncon
- Bosshoss
- BFG
- shootersix
- BeDome
- ibbob
