On Sat, 3 Feb 2024 09:59:50 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs
<
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Saturday, February 3, 2024 at 8:37:24?AM UTC-5, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
>> On Sunday, February 4, 2024 at 12:20:41?AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>> > On Friday, February 2, 2024 at 11:26:46?PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> > > On 02-Feb-24 12:32 pm, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>> > > > On Thursday, February 1, 2024 at 6:28:01?PM UTC-5, john larkin wrote:
>> > > >> On Thu, 1 Feb 2024 10:27:37 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs <
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <snip>
>> > > > 'The right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without government interference or regulation. The Supreme Court requires the government to provide substantial justification for interference with the right of free speech when it attempts to regulate the content of the speech.'
>> > > >
>> > > > They have ample substantial justification in these cases. The authority to do so will probably invoke the ICC.
>> > >
>> > > Perhaps we should just forcibly sterilise anyone who falls for this nonsense.
>> >
>> > That could be a plan when science finally gets around to proving idiocy is a heritable trait.
>> It won't. Idiocy is a complex trait, and not easy to measure.
>>
>> The various crude proxies for it - like scores on IQ tests and years in education - are slightly influenced by literally thousands of genes.
>>
>>
https://www.hoplofobia.info/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Robert-Plomin-Blueprint.pdf
>>
>> Sterilising adult examples of idiocy wouldn't make the next generation appreciably less idiotic.
>>
>> And we need idiots. How would we staff our personnel departments if we didn't have ready supply of them? Nobody who wasn't an idiot would take on the job.
>
>The law can be written in such a way that idiocy is presumed on the basis of a long list of material acts, such as habitual posting of false and misleading conspiracies on social media, and mindlessly concurring with such.
>
>>
>> We should really work on finding people who are excessively gullible, like John Larkin and Cursitor Doom, and protect them for the malicious propaganda to which they are so exceedingly vulnerable, but the people who make money out of generating malicious propaganda would complain that this was a restraint of trade.
>
>That gets turned around on them. The Interstate Commerce Clause gives Congress authority to regulate transactions. And government owns the airwaves, and subsidizes communications infrastructure. So when the idiots act up, they will can be slapped.
>
Turned around? The US military and the big national labs give us a lot
of business. They give us checks, not slaps.
My kind of gullibility seems to work.