• osarusan@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean that’s basically a rule that says they can’t associate with other GOP members, so it’s not surprising they’d reject it.

    • Telorand@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      And, as awful as Nazis are, there’s this thing called “freedom of association.” We’d have to change our Bill of Rights before a law like that wouldn’t be stricken by the courts.

      That means our only recourse is to work as hard to protect our democracy as they are trying to dismantle it.

      • Unaware7013@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        And, as awful as Nazis are, there’s this thing called “freedom of association.”

        Which includes the freedoms of private organizations to not associate with Nazis.

        We’d have to change our Bill of Rights before a law like that wouldn’t be stricken by the courts.

        We’re not talking about the government limiting associations, this is a private organization trying to limit what it’s members can do, which is perfectly legal and not even out of the ordinary. As far as I’m aware, the bill of rights is immaterial to this situation, considering we’re talking about private people interacting, something which you have no right to force upon people aside from protected classes.

      • Shapillon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well from what I understand it was supposed to be an internal code of conduct for the FL GOP rather than a law.