Quote (Ghot @ 1 Aug 2019 17:38)

Well, here's the problem. YOU don't know if they are or not. Neither does the rest of the world, apparently. Secondly, they only became Islamized in the 10th century. Their Islamism is the problem that China seems to have with them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghurs





Next time you go off the beam and get insane, I'm gonna start reporting it. There's a lot of things I don't know, but one thing I do know is I don't have to put up with YOUR crap.

Quote (Ghot @ Aug 1 2019 05:27pm)

In answer to all...

I'm not saying they violate free speech laws. I'm saying they aren't protected by them either. One California lower court judge, doesn't really count for much.


There is no precedent either way. SC has never ruled on this, as far as I know.


One case, that only gave half ruling to the claimant is not... "courts". It was a ruling about oriental signs, by a lower court with an oriental judge. Like I said earlier... kinda means diddly in the grand scheme of things. And even with the sign and the judge on the same side, so to speak.... he still HAD to rule that the street numbers had to be Arabic numerals ... aka non-Chinese.






You guys are acting like this is the law of the land... it's not. Sooner or later concerns over the "general welfare" (which has been ruled on 100's of times), will win out.







So all in all, I still stick with my statement in the OP. I think China passed a good law and I think sooner or later we will too.
The 1st Amendment is a great thing and I agree with it. I also know how fast it can be over turned when people think it should be. Anyone ever heard of... McCarthy?

Quote (Ghot @ Aug 1 2019 05:54pm)

No one is banning language or even what the language says. No one is banning anything... yet.

Eventually ONLY non-English on signs, will be banned, and it won't be up to a vote. I mean the kangaroo court in Pomona, CA has already ruled that the street numbers on businesses had to be Arabic numerals, for the general welfare.
And that was with an oriental judge no less.

And don't worry... the various rulings on banning certain books, will lose in court... eventually.

Quote (Ghot @ Aug 1 2019 08:06pm)

I'm finished. I have stated my point, many times. You are not required to agree.
Until, this gets taken to the SC, this will be an open issue, so there's really no point in stating my point another 10-20 times. :)

Quote (Ghot @ Aug 1 2019 05:21pm)

Well let's see. Since English IS the official language of the US, and the 1st Amendment does protect WHAT you say, but is silent on the language you use to say it... (deja vu), we can't use the 1st amendment for this issue.
At least until there is a ruling ON this issue.

All of experts on the law (lol), can go... take the written exam for a drivers license, or fill out your tax returns, or a marriage certificate in some language OTHER than English.... and see how far that gets you.


You're all quibbling. You know it, and so do I. If for one second...something avoidable happened to someone important or sympathy inducing enough, that could have been prevented if the SIGN in question was in English... you all KNOW the law would appear in a micro-heatbeat. saying all signs in the US have to be in English.

This has nothing to do with racism, genocide, the 1st amendment. It has ONLY to do with fucking common sense.


I already gave examples of fires, police, etc., maybe we need something more sympathy inducing. Let's see...


15 yr old girl gets kidnapped by sex traffickers, tossed in a van without windows and taken someplace to be sold. As she exits the van she happens to see a street address, a sign... etc., unfortunately she can't read them cuase they are in a language other than English. A few days later....she manages to get to a phone and call 911... oh shyt, she can't tell them where she is. Somehow, she manages to escape, tells her story to the press...

....3 days later the govt. passes a law stating that all street addresses and sign have to be in English.


Everyone here KNOWS that would happen. Pretending you don't or denying it... is just... being dishonest. :/

Quote (Ghot @ Aug 1 2019 08:06pm)

I'm finished. I have stated my point, many times. You are not required to agree.
Until, this gets taken to the SC, this will be an open issue, so there's really no point in stating my point another 10-20 times. :)

Quote (Surfpunk @ Aug 1 2019 09:40pm)

Meyer v Nebraska, 1923. SCOTUS ruled that banning foreign language instruction violated 14th Amendment protection for substantive due process, and Tinker ties that substantive due process directly to the 1st Amendment.

So there is legal precedent.