Reply With Quote
because having a personalized license plate made by the state is not a cons utional right.
go get a bumper sticker.
I have nothing but contempt for you, parts-changer. You can sign me up for the bigot against sophistry bandwagon as well.
because having a personalized license plate made by the state is not a cons utional right.
go get a bumper sticker.
Don't look in the mirror much, do you?
lol missing the whole point
lol cuck
lol broadcasting cuckoldry on internet
lol if you weren't so ing dumb maybe your wife wouldn't have gotten porked by some strange
Last edited by vy65; 08-26-2011 at 05:28 PM.
yes it can.
you're as stupid as Wild Cobra
lol sidestepping the whole point
Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School Dist., 508 U.S. __, __ (1993). The necessities of confining a forum to the limited and legitimate purposes for which it was created may justify the State in reserving it for certain groups or for the discussion of certain topics. See, e.g., Cornelius v. NAACP Legal Defense & Ed. Fund, Inc., 473 U.S. 788, 806 (1985); Perry Ed. Assn., supra, at 49. Once it has opened a limited forum, however, the State must respect the lawful boundaries it has itself set. The State may not exclude speech where its distinction is not "reasonable in light of the purpose served by the forum," Cornelius, supra, at 804-806; see also Perry Ed. Assn., supra, at 46, 49, nor may it discriminate against speech on the basis of its viewpoint, Lamb's Chapel, supra, at __ ; see also Perry Ed. Assn., supra, at 46; R.A.V., supra, at ___; cf. Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397, 414-415 (1989). Thus, in determining whether the State is acting to preserve the limits of the forum it has created so that the exclusion of a class of speech is legitimate, we have observed a distinction between, on the one hand, content discrimination, which may be permissible if it preserves the purposes of that limited forum, and, on the other hand, viewpoint discrimination, which is presumed impermissible when directed against speech otherwise within the forum's limitations. See Perry Ed. Assn., supra, at 46.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htm...5_0819_ZO.html
lol cuckold
A license plate doesn't fall under freedom of speech.
lol sock puppetQ. Is the TxDMV, or My Plates, under an obligation to produce my
specialty license plate design?
A. No. Every license plate design issued in the state of Texas must be approved by the TxDMV board.
http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot...p_brochure.pdf
lol dumber than Wild Cobra
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wooley_v._Maynard
lol cucked for years
tbh, you clowns need to take your bs back to The Club forum.
Not really afraid, it's easier to spot s that way. How else would the righteous find a way to bash their head in? I say show those flags, swastikas, white gowns with pride.
Like all wars, it was about money and power. The poor white man was dead beside the poor black man, neither with shoes to wear, while the rich white man was warm in his home (on both sides, some too warm in Atlanta).
Citizens of new hampshire wanted a phrase removed from their license plates.
You want to force the state to put something on the plate.
Big difference.
lol sock puppets
pff.. it always amuses me when bigots cry over intolerance.
A racist doesn't have the moral high ground or right to demand tolerance for his intolerance.
Just because the rebel flag is a sign of oppression to some, it doesn't mean that people who like it, like it for that reason.
That's why I say the idea it stands for racism is the intolerant idea.
It's the flag behind this idea:
“We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.”
You're just too stupid to own up to it.
It doesn't matter that someone applied the flag to that.
Do you really believe that everyone who likes the rebel flag is that way?
Why can't you liberals learn tolerance?
Sure it matters. The declaration predates the creation of the flag. The flag is merely a symbol to that declaration. You're just too dumb to understand that the flag and the declaration are one and the same.
Just like Swastikas represent the Nazi party.
It's not just liberals that don't tolerate racists like you.
Yeah, and the Swastika is just an ancient Hindu good luck symbol... give me a ing break!
Why can't you cheerleaders keep up with a debate that doesn't fall neatly along party lines?
Now if we had any Hindu's displaying their cultural variety of one, you probable wouldn't even think it a swastika... They do look a little different!
I have nothing against blacks, I just want to own one or two of them. (not racist)
Lol moving goalposts
Lol ty reading comprehension skills
It was your failed analogy, not mine.
Sorry you can't comprehend your failure.
lol sock puppets
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions