Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The evidence is in your face. The obvious bias of the trial and the judge. The whole show is a joke. If you can't see it then you're clueless or else you don't want to see it. Or you don't know enough about the topic to even judge correctly for yourself.
Links don't do you any good by themselves. It is up to you to quote the applicable parts of those articles. Once again, there is nothing about punitive judgements themselves that make them unconstitutional. You would need to show that this is excessive. Do you really think that you can do that?
I can just as easily claim that he was guilty without any evidence as you just did.
It could be. It would not be the first time that lawyers defending someone that they knew was a monster punted the case.
And please note. The side suing Alex told the attorneys from the other side that they got sent everything off of Jones's phone and they did nothing about it. They may have been able to claim privilege for parts of that document but did not do so. That meant that they could not object when it was introduced as evidence and they did not complain.
You may find it distasteful, or even egregiously wrong. And no doubt, there are a bunch of idiots who may have caused harm because of his act because they lack the ability to discern.
Defamation, slander and libel are things you can be punished for according to the law. And such punishments should not be a hard flat rate but consider the offending party's ability to pay when weighing against the damages done. If someone can't pay then it just can't be paid and it's pointless and dumb to put someone in jail over, which only ensures the situation is exacerbated.
More reminds me when they wail and scream and gnash their teeth over social media censorship, which basically does amount to them throwing a colossal ***** fit over having the rules applied to them.
Honestly it’s kind of embarrassing to witness, from the other side of the pond.
Definitely. They think the world hates them because the "love" Jesus and they long and yearn and crave and desire martyrdom.
Yeah….
Yet broad freedoms require the citizen to be responsible in tat usage. It doesn't mean you can say anything you damn well please when it harms people. All rights have limits, and that is the responsible use versus harmful use. Jones crossed the line and he was sued and lost in court.
What jones lied about were demonstrable facts, and his audience was willing to be duped by him. Jones knew this apparently yet made money on these lies. The lies ended up causing harm to the families who lost children. That isn't a responsible use of freedom.
This isn't about being offended. Jones used speech to make money and as a result caused harm to innocent families. He knew this and did not care. That is an abuse of rights and civil responsibility. He was sued and he lost.
Rubbish. Question everything you like. Just don't make up lies and pretend they're truth -- that's very different from asking questions.
It's more that the questions and perspectives Alex Jones provides are ones that crawl out of his *** and are less based on reality than Game of Thrones.
Rubbish is what you just said. You would have to prove that someone had intentionally lied and not just been mistaken which people often are. So your idea of prosecuting mistakes is rubbish. You see you can't win regulating people's freedom of speech.
