libananahammock t1_j4qzk9i wrote on January 17, 2023 at 5:37 PM

Reply to comment by CltAltAcctDel in LAWSUIT: FIRE sues Pennsylvania county after officials ban talking politics in a public park by NeatPeteYeet

Lol that’s rich coming from you

CltAltAcctDel t1_j4r09na wrote on January 17, 2023 at 5:41 PM

Excellent job addressing the underlying issue.

libananahammock t1_j4r2hba wrote on January 17, 2023 at 5:55 PM

Lol okay bud you’re the one who took it off topic. Keep being the hypocrite you’ve been on Reddit. Rules for thee but not for me, am I right?

And the funding was talking about the group in the article who was threatening to sue. I mentioned it because they themselves call themselves non partisan.

Also, if your wife or daughter was with their kids in the park you’d be okay with an aggressive candidate in their face asking for their full name, address and phone number? I don’t give a crap what political party you a part of or claim to be a part of (any creeper can claim to be collecting signatures) I don’t want to be approached in the park by an aggressive man. I mean you’d think the party that screams pedo at anyone they don’t like would understand that some people are cautious around strange people being AGGRESSIVE when campaigning which many people who were there said as much if you read other articles about this that aren’t published by the people with the agenda.

CltAltAcctDel t1_j4r4a13 wrote on January 17, 2023 at 6:06 PM

You assumed the candidate was aggressive. You’ve created a whole narrative of how this went down based on zero evidence. Which just bolsters my initial point that facts are the least important of your position.

Candidates for office are required to approach people to get signatures. It’s either approach them in public places like sidewalks or parks or go door to door. If you have an issue with them obtain personal information your issue is with the law not the candidate

If a candidate or their campaigners are being aggressive and harassing people that is not covered by the 1st amendment.

libananahammock t1_j4r4eav wrote on January 17, 2023 at 6:06 PM

LOL I didn’t assume, like you like to say DO YOUR RESEARCH! Look it up bud

CltAltAcctDel t1_j4rahtl wrote on January 17, 2023 at 6:43 PM

Link it. I’ve found nothing that indicates they were being aggressive. If you’ve got something I’ll be more than happy to read. That doesn’t change the underlying point that peaceful gathering petitions is protected speech and anyone who defends free speech should be applauded for that defense