SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Recently, oral arguments were heard regarding a case about license plates and the first amendment. The Texas division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans has challenged a rejection of their proposed plate that had images of the Confederate flag.
The Texas solicitor general argued that, "Messages on Texas license plates are government speech ... [because] Texas etches its name onto each license plate and Texas law gives the state sole control and final approval authority over everything that appears on a license plate.”
Please share your ideas/comments on this case or your views on vanity plates in general.
Story: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-supreme-court-confederate-license-plates-20150323-story.html
Case: http://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2014/2014_14_144
What a vanity plate is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanity_plate
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday April 06 2015, @05:07AM
Yeah, you racist! How can you not even see the difference? Let me lay it out.
George Washington was worse than Adolf Hitler, because Washington was a traitor to his country, which was Great Britain,
No one is a Britain, and the Britons are long gone. Besides, they were Celts, anyway. So what makes you think that Ol' George was a citizen of Great Britain? Certainly, he did not have rights equal to a British citizen! So how could he commit treason? But as before, this slips down into a major confusion about what is at stake in politics.
Treason is the betrayal of those who trust you. It is not the betrayal of those who for some pathological reason claim that you must obey them. Does this distinction make sense to you? Loyalty is something given, not something that can be demanded. Alright, now that we have that straight, let's move on the the next postulate. If loyalty can only be given, then we can only commit treason against those we have given loyalty to. Follows, right? Now, what if those that we have sworn loyalty to change such that we no longer grant them loyalty? Sticky wicket, say what? But this is the crux. You can withdraw loyalty, as I believe Washington that the other American Revolutionaries did, or you can pretend to keep it, and use that pretense to your advantage, based on the trust of those whom you have neglected to inform of your change of allegiance. They have to still trust you in order for you to betray them. If you have openly declared your change of heart, treason is impossible. Washington was no traitor. He did own slaves, however. Hmmm.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 06 2015, @12:00PM
Treason is the betrayal of those who trust you. It is not the betrayal of those who for some pathological reason claim that you must obey them.
And yet they were thought of as traitors. And they don't have to trust you; you just had to swear allegiance to them at some point.