Last edited by laska; 09-16-14 at 05:52 PM.
I think the Supreme Court has ruled that money is free speech, correct? I haven't studied their arguments and I may be missing something. I am certainly no Constitutional scholar.
$40 means 'May I have a lap dance please?'.
'What kind of sick and twisted toy factory is this?'
'We are all the sum of our tears. Too little and the ground is not fertile, and nothing can grow there. Too much, the best of us is washed away.'
"Better to be dead and cool, than alive and uncool."
☮★★☮ Just a democratic-socialist in the heartland of America.CHECK OUT MY TUMBLR(BLOG)HERE "Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression, and violence, and enjoy it to the full."
Freedom of Speech is seen as an inherent right. That means that even the poorest of the poor have it as a right.
Money gives you access to ways in which you can spread your opinions and views. It is not a form of expression in and of itself.
One main logical reason why not:
If tomorrow the dollar's value drops to 0 and suddenly we're worthless and can't even buy a drop of water to drink that doesn't mean we no longer have freedom of speech.
Also: what if tomorrow TV's suddenly disappeared off the face of the earth? And books? Those are just forms of communication.
What the above quote tells us is that some people value the concept of money *way too much*.
These people falsely believe that being rich = being worthy of more attention or respect. (Or your vote).
What if no one gave a listening ear to anyone using money to advertise? Suddenly advertising has no purpose. You must have an audience that is receptive and supportive in order for your advertisements to be fruitful.
And that is not what a 'freedoms' and 'rights' mean. Freedoms and rights are not something that can be shut out. Freedoms and rights cannot be devalued, stockpiled, and traded on the stock market, or bought.
[and another logical fallacy behind this concept: What if we went to a bartering system. Where tangible items or services were exchanged for other tangible items (pamphlets and books) and services (airtime on the radio). Would that, then, mean that every thing which carried any potential exchangeable value was a 'currency' which was a 'means of expression'. The entire thing is preposterous when you pick apart the further implications of it]
Last edited by Aunt Spiker; 09-16-14 at 11:45 PM.
A screaming comes across the sky.
It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow