fuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuck
The 2nd amendment* is hostile to a free society. There is no liberty possible when the exercise of the freedom of assembly, of speech, of religion, offers target practice to 2A-armed murderers
*At a minimum, in its current maximalist interpretation.
The 2nd amendment* is hostile to a free society. There is no liberty possible when the exercise of the freedom of assembly, of speech, of religion, offers target practice to 2A-armed murderers
*At a minimum, in its current maximalist interpretation.
Brown University says there's an active shooter on campus. Emergency scanner says multiple victims, but unclear how many.
Video footage viewed by the Brown Daily Herald "depicted several individuals lying on the ground near the Sciences Library appearing to be assisted by police."
Video footage viewed by the Brown Daily Herald "depicted several individuals lying on the ground near the Sciences Library appearing to be assisted by police."
Active shooter on campus, Department of Public Safety reports
The alert and call was sent to students immediately by DPS following the incident, urging students to hide, run or evacuate until further notice.
www.browndailyherald.com
December 13, 2025 at 10:31 PM
fuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuck
The 2nd amendment* is hostile to a free society. There is no liberty possible when the exercise of the freedom of assembly, of speech, of religion, offers target practice to 2A-armed murderers
*At a minimum, in its current maximalist interpretation.
The 2nd amendment* is hostile to a free society. There is no liberty possible when the exercise of the freedom of assembly, of speech, of religion, offers target practice to 2A-armed murderers
*At a minimum, in its current maximalist interpretation.
"First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; "
This is art; beautiful, tragic and an interpretation
This is art; beautiful, tragic and an interpretation
Critics of this stuff are as (intentionally) bad at reading the Bible as they are at reading the constitution.
Supporters of the displays say the Bible is on their side, but critics call the scenes sacrilegious and politically divisive, accusing the churches of abusing sacred imagery. n.pr/4rTabaD
December 14, 2025 at 7:09 PM
"First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; "
This is art; beautiful, tragic and an interpretation
This is art; beautiful, tragic and an interpretation
Curtailing, no
Interpretation sensitive to the reality of the age, which does not simply assume that "everything that happens on the internet is speech, and therefore protected"? You betcha!
Interpretation sensitive to the reality of the age, which does not simply assume that "everything that happens on the internet is speech, and therefore protected"? You betcha!
December 6, 2025 at 4:17 AM
Curtailing, no
Interpretation sensitive to the reality of the age, which does not simply assume that "everything that happens on the internet is speech, and therefore protected"? You betcha!
Interpretation sensitive to the reality of the age, which does not simply assume that "everything that happens on the internet is speech, and therefore protected"? You betcha!
AL: Not a permissible interpretation of that statute+regs to say ICE can simply decide, based on a students speech, or for no reason at all, even though someone is in valid student status, it is not going to maintain that record. Not a permissible interpretation of those provisions.
December 4, 2025 at 7:58 PM
AL: Not a permissible interpretation of that statute+regs to say ICE can simply decide, based on a students speech, or for no reason at all, even though someone is in valid student status, it is not going to maintain that record. Not a permissible interpretation of those provisions.
Frederick Douglass’s speech given a week after the Civil Rights Case (1882) struck down the Civil Rights Act of 1875:
“[The Supreme Court] has construed the Constitution in defiant disregard what was the object and intention of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
www.loc.gov/item/mss1187...
“[The Supreme Court] has construed the Constitution in defiant disregard what was the object and intention of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
www.loc.gov/item/mss1187...
December 7, 2025 at 9:35 PM
Frederick Douglass’s speech given a week after the Civil Rights Case (1882) struck down the Civil Rights Act of 1875:
“[The Supreme Court] has construed the Constitution in defiant disregard what was the object and intention of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
www.loc.gov/item/mss1187...
“[The Supreme Court] has construed the Constitution in defiant disregard what was the object and intention of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
www.loc.gov/item/mss1187...
Wrong.
No, they can't as the intent and interpretation of "public interest" is not that broad.
Further, such an interpretation would be held "unconstitutionally vague" for such a basis over free speech rights.
No, they can't as the intent and interpretation of "public interest" is not that broad.
Further, such an interpretation would be held "unconstitutionally vague" for such a basis over free speech rights.
December 3, 2025 at 1:41 PM
Wrong.
No, they can't as the intent and interpretation of "public interest" is not that broad.
Further, such an interpretation would be held "unconstitutionally vague" for such a basis over free speech rights.
No, they can't as the intent and interpretation of "public interest" is not that broad.
Further, such an interpretation would be held "unconstitutionally vague" for such a basis over free speech rights.
It's about time religion is revealed for what it too often actually is - an excuse. Hate is hate.
Currently, the law exempts hateful or antisemitic speech if it based in good faith on the interpretation of a religious text, but that immunity is set to be removed.
Currently, the law exempts hateful or antisemitic speech if it based in good faith on the interpretation of a religious text, but that immunity is set to be removed.
Liberal deal with Bloc means hate-speech laws will lose exemption for 'sincerely held' religious belief
The Liberals have agreed to remove a religious exemption in to secure Bloc Québécois support for a bill targeting hate crimes
nationalpost.com
December 1, 2025 at 11:08 PM
It's about time religion is revealed for what it too often actually is - an excuse. Hate is hate.
Currently, the law exempts hateful or antisemitic speech if it based in good faith on the interpretation of a religious text, but that immunity is set to be removed.
Currently, the law exempts hateful or antisemitic speech if it based in good faith on the interpretation of a religious text, but that immunity is set to be removed.
from friends to enemies, and from enemies to friends... or was it lovers?? (guess the world may never know,,, 🤔)
anyhow, more SplatMixels, featuring the veterans of the legendary "Great Turf War"!
#mixels | #splatoon | #splatoonart | #art | #splatmixels | #lego | #legomoc
anyhow, more SplatMixels, featuring the veterans of the legendary "Great Turf War"!
#mixels | #splatoon | #splatoonart | #art | #splatmixels | #lego | #legomoc
December 2, 2025 at 2:33 PM
from friends to enemies, and from enemies to friends... or was it lovers?? (guess the world may never know,,, 🤔)
anyhow, more SplatMixels, featuring the veterans of the legendary "Great Turf War"!
#mixels | #splatoon | #splatoonart | #art | #splatmixels | #lego | #legomoc
anyhow, more SplatMixels, featuring the veterans of the legendary "Great Turf War"!
#mixels | #splatoon | #splatoonart | #art | #splatmixels | #lego | #legomoc
It's time everyone ignored anything about the government in the media that is not based entirely on an official statement, speech, press release or interview.
And even then, ensure you're fully aware of the FULL context of what was said (and any questions asked), rather than media interpretation.
And even then, ensure you're fully aware of the FULL context of what was said (and any questions asked), rather than media interpretation.
November 30, 2025 at 11:07 AM
It's time everyone ignored anything about the government in the media that is not based entirely on an official statement, speech, press release or interview.
And even then, ensure you're fully aware of the FULL context of what was said (and any questions asked), rather than media interpretation.
And even then, ensure you're fully aware of the FULL context of what was said (and any questions asked), rather than media interpretation.
It's time everyone ignored anything about the government in the media that is not based entirely on an official statement, speech, press release or interview.
And even then, ensure you're fully aware of the FULL context of what was said (and any questions asked), rather than media interpretation.
And even then, ensure you're fully aware of the FULL context of what was said (and any questions asked), rather than media interpretation.
November 30, 2025 at 10:11 AM
It's time everyone ignored anything about the government in the media that is not based entirely on an official statement, speech, press release or interview.
And even then, ensure you're fully aware of the FULL context of what was said (and any questions asked), rather than media interpretation.
And even then, ensure you're fully aware of the FULL context of what was said (and any questions asked), rather than media interpretation.
I keep thinking of Barbara Jordan's speech in 1974, when she spoke on impeachment articles being prepared against Nixon: "Through the process of amendment, interpretation, and court decision, I have finally been included in 'we, the People'."
That it took a man steeped in racism to see that and
That it took a man steeped in racism to see that and
November 28, 2025 at 8:20 AM
I keep thinking of Barbara Jordan's speech in 1974, when she spoke on impeachment articles being prepared against Nixon: "Through the process of amendment, interpretation, and court decision, I have finally been included in 'we, the People'."
That it took a man steeped in racism to see that and
That it took a man steeped in racism to see that and
'Speaking to Times Higher Education shortly after Kendall’s speech at the Science Museum this week, Vallance said this interpretation [research concentrated in large universities; other HEIs focusing on teaching] was a “very bizarre reading of the White Paper”.' 2/3
November 26, 2025 at 8:37 AM
'Speaking to Times Higher Education shortly after Kendall’s speech at the Science Museum this week, Vallance said this interpretation [research concentrated in large universities; other HEIs focusing on teaching] was a “very bizarre reading of the White Paper”.' 2/3
Elorise 023 RWB G1
#ocart #originalcharacter #artwork
#art #ocdesign #characterdesign #Oc #digitaloc #draw #characterart
#robot #thestrangealien #digitalart
#robotoc #originalcharacteroc #drawing #digital #digitaloc
#thestrangealienoc #robotart
#thestrangealienart #ocartwork
#ocart #originalcharacter #artwork
#art #ocdesign #characterdesign #Oc #digitaloc #draw #characterart
#robot #thestrangealien #digitalart
#robotoc #originalcharacteroc #drawing #digital #digitaloc
#thestrangealienoc #robotart
#thestrangealienart #ocartwork
November 25, 2025 at 11:40 PM
Their personal brain jester #deltarune #art
November 25, 2025 at 3:31 AM
Their personal brain jester #deltarune #art
I am confident about my Speech and Debate Clause assertion because I cannot see how any other interpretation of it would square with the separation of powers doctrine.
November 24, 2025 at 11:35 PM
I am confident about my Speech and Debate Clause assertion because I cannot see how any other interpretation of it would square with the separation of powers doctrine.
This dogmatic, perverse, extremist interpretation of what "freedom of speech" means and entails and how so many americans consider it to be sacred and far more important than the lives of actual human beings is such mental poison. It's antithetical to any kind of progressive society.
November 24, 2025 at 8:27 AM
This dogmatic, perverse, extremist interpretation of what "freedom of speech" means and entails and how so many americans consider it to be sacred and far more important than the lives of actual human beings is such mental poison. It's antithetical to any kind of progressive society.
You can't throw a corporation in jail, Ari. You can regulate it - including its speech - just like we regulated the speech of tobacco companies targeting adverts at children to get them addicted to cigarettes.
But yeah. Hate speech isn't protected by the 1st Amendment in a reasonable interpretation
But yeah. Hate speech isn't protected by the 1st Amendment in a reasonable interpretation
November 24, 2025 at 3:59 PM
You can't throw a corporation in jail, Ari. You can regulate it - including its speech - just like we regulated the speech of tobacco companies targeting adverts at children to get them addicted to cigarettes.
But yeah. Hate speech isn't protected by the 1st Amendment in a reasonable interpretation
But yeah. Hate speech isn't protected by the 1st Amendment in a reasonable interpretation
You ain’t fucking kidding, damn hippies.
November 23, 2025 at 7:40 PM
You ain’t fucking kidding, damn hippies.
"Speeches" don't have rights, rights are for people.
It should go without saying that if an interpretation of "freedom of speech" makes it so the ability to spew abuse and hate is more important than the safety of people, then yeah, it absolutely is supporting the contents of said hate speech.
It should go without saying that if an interpretation of "freedom of speech" makes it so the ability to spew abuse and hate is more important than the safety of people, then yeah, it absolutely is supporting the contents of said hate speech.
November 24, 2025 at 8:32 AM
"Speeches" don't have rights, rights are for people.
It should go without saying that if an interpretation of "freedom of speech" makes it so the ability to spew abuse and hate is more important than the safety of people, then yeah, it absolutely is supporting the contents of said hate speech.
It should go without saying that if an interpretation of "freedom of speech" makes it so the ability to spew abuse and hate is more important than the safety of people, then yeah, it absolutely is supporting the contents of said hate speech.
My interpretation of Ze's speech: 1) tells Trump Ukr won't surrender; 2) warns Europeans not to leave Ukr to deal w Trump's pressure and Ru's onslaught alone, because Ukr may buckle and then European freedom is on the line; 3) tries damage control over the corruption scandal by reminding...
November 21, 2025 at 7:39 PM
My interpretation of Ze's speech: 1) tells Trump Ukr won't surrender; 2) warns Europeans not to leave Ukr to deal w Trump's pressure and Ru's onslaught alone, because Ukr may buckle and then European freedom is on the line; 3) tries damage control over the corruption scandal by reminding...
Has Marianne Williamson always been a Islamophobe or is this a new grift she’s going for? I actually don’t know.
November 21, 2025 at 4:04 PM
Has Marianne Williamson always been a Islamophobe or is this a new grift she’s going for? I actually don’t know.
Yes.
And the interpretation of “corporate personhood”, stemming back to the 14th Amendment, & Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad.
Was never going to be good for democracy or society, that money = speech, when the entities that typically have the most money (corporations) = people.
And the interpretation of “corporate personhood”, stemming back to the 14th Amendment, & Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad.
Was never going to be good for democracy or society, that money = speech, when the entities that typically have the most money (corporations) = people.
November 17, 2025 at 5:08 AM
Yes.
And the interpretation of “corporate personhood”, stemming back to the 14th Amendment, & Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad.
Was never going to be good for democracy or society, that money = speech, when the entities that typically have the most money (corporations) = people.
And the interpretation of “corporate personhood”, stemming back to the 14th Amendment, & Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad.
Was never going to be good for democracy or society, that money = speech, when the entities that typically have the most money (corporations) = people.
This is true. As soon as we start working with an actor in a studio, the rewriting begins and the end result is always better. That's what we stand to lose with "text-to-speech" — the interpretation, reimagining, elevation of the original text.
If your game has voice acting, then working with the voice actors is half of your writing process. It's not complete until you've heard it interpreted and reimagined by a voice actor. And they always reimagine it in ways that elevate the writing, in ways you never would have imagined yourself.
November 12, 2025 at 9:12 AM
This is true. As soon as we start working with an actor in a studio, the rewriting begins and the end result is always better. That's what we stand to lose with "text-to-speech" — the interpretation, reimagining, elevation of the original text.
Somebody woke up in the middle of the night and angry typed this.
This is sending me to the moon 😭
This is sending me to the moon 😭
November 11, 2025 at 3:40 AM
Somebody woke up in the middle of the night and angry typed this.
This is sending me to the moon 😭
This is sending me to the moon 😭
No one who listened to Trump’s speech at the time can have had their interpretation altered by a BBC edit of the whole damned thing.
He incited a failed insurrection.
A man who lies habitually is extorting millions from broadcasters, having comedians fired, and forcing resignations.
He incited a failed insurrection.
A man who lies habitually is extorting millions from broadcasters, having comedians fired, and forcing resignations.
November 10, 2025 at 12:16 PM
No one who listened to Trump’s speech at the time can have had their interpretation altered by a BBC edit of the whole damned thing.
He incited a failed insurrection.
A man who lies habitually is extorting millions from broadcasters, having comedians fired, and forcing resignations.
He incited a failed insurrection.
A man who lies habitually is extorting millions from broadcasters, having comedians fired, and forcing resignations.