1 of 2
1
ACLU Files Lawsuit On Behalf Of TN Tarot Reader
Posted: 16 October 2010 02:04 PM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3050
Joined  2010-04-26

Link

A tarot card reader in Tennessee has been banned from peddling her faux abilities and the ACLU has filed a suit claiming that her 1st Amendment rights have been violated.  Her right to free speech isn’t being violated, she’s not just saying she has psychic powers, she’s charging people.

*sigh*  And the ACLU wonders why people laugh at them sometimes.

 Signature 

“In the end nature is horrific and teaches us nothing.” -Mutual of Omicron

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 October 2010 02:29 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6094
Joined  2009-02-26
Dead Monky - 16 October 2010 02:04 PM

Link

A tarot card reader in Tennessee has been banned from peddling her faux abilities and the ACLU has filed a suit claiming that her 1st Amendment rights have been violated.  Her right to free speech isn’t being violated, she’s not just saying she has psychic powers, she’s charging people.

Kinda like big money is allowed to donate to causes and representatives, without having to disclose their support for cause or person, or why.  Seems there is not much difference between charging for a service and anonymously donating huge sums of money and resources. By paying a fee, the client is exercising his/her 1st amendment rights. Can we deny them that?

[ Edited: 16 October 2010 02:35 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 October 2010 03:54 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  63
Joined  2010-09-24
Write4U - 16 October 2010 02:29 PM

Kinda like big money is allowed to donate to causes and representatives, without having to disclose their support for cause or person, or why.  Seems there is not much difference between charging for a service and anonymously donating huge sums of money and resources.

While I can’t agree with that claptrap…

Write4U - 16 October 2010 02:29 PM

By paying a fee, the client is exercising his/her 1st amendment rights. Can we deny them that?

Very well said.

-RC

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 October 2010 04:06 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6094
Joined  2009-02-26
Ruat Caelum - 16 October 2010 03:54 PM
Write4U - 16 October 2010 02:29 PM

Kinda like big money is allowed to donate to causes and representatives, without having to disclose their support for cause or person, or why.  Seems there is not much difference between charging for a service and anonymously donating huge sums of money and resources.

While I can’t agree with that claptrap…

Write4U - 16 October 2010 02:29 PM

By paying a fee, the client is exercising his/her 1st amendment rights. Can we deny them that?

Very well said.

-RC

If you believe that Money (the purpose of which is a convenient and standardized means in the exercise of obtaining quid pro quo) is speech.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 October 2010 04:30 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  63
Joined  2010-09-24

I’d love nothing more than to discuss these issues.

Please, if you would, define what the term “money” means in finite terms.

-RC

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 October 2010 05:37 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6094
Joined  2009-02-26
Ruat Caelum - 16 October 2010 04:30 PM

I’d love nothing more than to discuss these issues.

Please, if you would, define what the term “money” means in finite terms.

-RC

I take the literal definition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money

Nowhere do I see money referred to as speech per se.

[ Edited: 16 October 2010 05:39 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 October 2010 06:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1071
Joined  2007-06-20
Write4U - 16 October 2010 05:37 PM

Nowhere do I see money referred to as speech per se.

A woman dancing naked on a stage is not speech either, but that is clearly a First Amendment protected activity.  Besides, there is more than just speech in the First Amendment: 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...or the right of the people peaceably to assemble...
[Emphasis added.]

So tarot cards would fall under both the religion category and the people peaceably assembling category.  Whether some skeptics like it or not, some people like such nonsense.  So unless the tarot card reader is clearly abusing their clientele by taking an exorbitant amount of money from someone (perhaps with a diminished capacity) under false pretenses, the state just needs to back off and let the few fools who wish to part with their money for what basically amounts to a form of entertainment.

Now if a tarot card reader is taking the life savings of some unsuspecting person by playing on their fears, then I can see a need for the state to step in and stop the fraud.

 Signature 

There are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by the gradual and silent encroachment of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpation.

—James Madison

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 October 2010 07:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  63
Joined  2010-09-24

Well said Roc, I just can’t agree with…

Rocinante - 16 October 2010 06:58 PM
Write4U - 16 October 2010 05:37 PM

Now if a tarot card reader is taking the life savings of some unsuspecting person by playing on their fears, then I can see a need for the state to step in and stop the fraud.

That is no place for gov’t.

-RC

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 October 2010 07:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1071
Joined  2007-06-20
Ruat Caelum - 16 October 2010 07:09 PM

That is no place for gov’t.

-RC

One of the few legitimate areas for government to be involved is in stopping force and fraud.  The penny ante stuff like a tarot card reader is just a waste of time and tax money for the state to step in.  Most people who go to those things get some enjoyment out of it.  But on those few big cases where some old unsuspecting lady is being fleeced out of house and life savings by some conman convincing her she needs a curse lifted (or whatever)...even this libertarian can see a case for the state stepping in and stopping the conman.  It just depends on the case.

 Signature 

There are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by the gradual and silent encroachment of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpation.

—James Madison

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 October 2010 07:22 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  63
Joined  2010-09-24

So I’ll wait for your class-action suit against casinos.

You don’t sound very libertarian to me.

People have a right to dump their money down whatever statistically illogical pipe they like. Even if religion becomes involved.

Or are you against the banking and real estate markets now too? wink

-RC

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 October 2010 07:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1071
Joined  2007-06-20
Ruat Caelum - 16 October 2010 07:22 PM

So I’ll wait for your class-action suit against casinos.

You don’t sound very libertarian to me.

People have a right to dump their money down whatever statistically illogical pipe they like. Even if religion becomes involved.

Or are you against the banking and real estate markets now too? wink

-RC

Notice I said, “...few…unsuspecting…fleeced…conman…”

Yes, people have a right to burn their money if they wish.  But on those cases where fraud is involved, then it is a different story.  When I play blackjack, I know the odds.  But if the dealer is using marked cards, then that is fraud. 

Most tarot card readers truly believe what they are doing is real, so it is not fraud.  Very rarely does a conman try to take advantage of someone by lying to them to try and get their money.  It is the lying that makes the difference.

 Signature 

There are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by the gradual and silent encroachment of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpation.

—James Madison

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 October 2010 08:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  63
Joined  2010-09-24
Rocinante - 16 October 2010 07:34 PM

When I play blackjack, I know the odds.  But if the dealer is using marked cards, then that is fraud.

You do, but do most people? One of my old math teachers used to say “gambling is the tax you pay for not understanding statistics.” When the house has a 78% chance of winning and doesn’t inform people when walking in the door, can you make a valid case for the difference between the Taj and a three card monte stand?

Thinking you’ll win the lottery is self deception. Thinking that someone with a deck of playing cards with spirit signs will unlock the future is the identical case.

So please, differentiate between “daddy needs a new pair’o shoes” and “daddy wants to know what the tarot cards think about his new job.”

Rocinante - 16 October 2010 07:34 PM

Most tarot card readers truly believe what they are doing is real, so it is not fraud.

Really, you know this because of what evidence? 

Rocinante - 16 October 2010 07:34 PM

Very rarely does a conman try to take advantage of someone by lying to them to try and get their money.

Um, what? Is there a spelling error in there I missed?

Rocinante - 16 October 2010 07:34 PM

It is the lying that makes the difference.

By your logic, a three card monte hustle isn’t lying because if a person knows the rules, they should be able to detect the cheat or “game” if you’d like to use politically correct terms.

The only difference between the casino and the psychic is that one doesn’t pretend you’ll get your money back in the end.

-RC

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 October 2010 10:40 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1071
Joined  2007-06-20
Ruat Caelum - 16 October 2010 08:50 PM
Rocinante - 16 October 2010 07:34 PM

Very rarely does a conman try to take advantage of someone by lying to them to try and get their money.

Um, what? Is there a spelling error in there I missed?

Ok, I admit this was very poorly worded by me and I apologize. 

I meant to say that on the one hand there are these 10 bucks-a-reading “psychics” who give their little “readings” to people - these are the majority of the “psychics” out there.  Most people get what they want from them - to be told they have much unused potential; that they have a strong need for approval and recognition; they have a great deal of unused energy which they have not yet turned to their advantage, etc.  And their wallet still contains money to buy lunch with their friends and talk about what a fun time they had. 

On the other hand are the rarer form, the Inside Men.  These are the ones who pull the long cons like the Pigeon Drop, Bank Examiner Scam, Jamaican Hustle for retirees’ life savings; or even the short cons like Put and Takes, Hot Seats, Big Mitt, etc. on any Apple trying to fleece them out of just their poke.  This second type generally tends to include the sociopaths and the repeat offenders that I have no problem with the police going after.  And don’t you dare fucking question my libertarianism again by me stating this.  I know more about cons, cheating and swindles than most.  And I’m also one hardcore libertarian.  And I know the second type of conman is clearly, without a doubt, committing fraud.  And any libertarian worth their salt realizes that fraud is wrong.  Even if the 10 dollar Tarot “reader” doesn’t truly believe what they are doing, it couldn’t be proven they don’t.  So police, court and jail resources are wasted on them.  Not so for the the grifts of the second type.  They don’t belong in society.   

Fraud is like porn.  Defining it ain’t easy, but I know it when I see it.  I see the 10 buck tarot card “reader” of the first type and I shrug it off.  I see the second type as a legitimate target for law enforcement.     

As for everything else, you really need to take a chill pill and perhaps switch to decaf.

 Signature 

There are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by the gradual and silent encroachment of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpation.

—James Madison

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 October 2010 11:28 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6094
Joined  2009-02-26
Rocinante - 16 October 2010 06:58 PM
Write4U - 16 October 2010 05:37 PM

Nowhere do I see money referred to as speech per se.

A woman dancing naked on a stage is not speech either, but that is clearly a First Amendment protected activity.  Besides, there is more than just speech in the First Amendment: 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...or the right of the people peaceably to assemble...
[Emphasis added.]

So tarot cards would fall under both the religion category and the people peaceably assembling category.  Whether some skeptics like it or not, some people like such nonsense.  So unless the tarot card reader is clearly abusing their clientele by taking an exorbitant amount of money from someone (perhaps with a diminished capacity) under false pretenses, the state just needs to back off and let the few fools who wish to part with their money for what basically amounts to a form of entertainment.

Now if a tarot card reader is taking the life savings of some unsuspecting person by playing on their fears, then I can see a need for the state to step in and stop the fraud.

I agree with everything you said, but try to open a topless bar or nude nightclub. Seems that such speech is prohibited in certain areas, by ordinance. What about No Smoking areas? Is smoking protected speech?
I fear that attempts to broaden the interpretations of the Constitution and BOR too much will result in anarchy.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 October 2010 11:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6094
Joined  2009-02-26
Ruat Caelum - 16 October 2010 07:22 PM

So I’ll wait for your class-action suit against casinos.

You don’t sound very libertarian to me.

People have a right to dump their money down whatever statistically illogical pipe they like. Even if religion becomes involved.

Or are you against the banking and real estate markets now too? wink

-RC

No you cannot burn or dump money down a pipe. It is NOT your money. It is a government backed voucher for exchanging values that could otherwise not be exchanged conveniently. You also cannot burn your house, because it might be a danger to neighbors.
The function of government is very much involved in people’s daily lives. That is what we elect them to do. Why have a “government” if not for regulating federal and state social standards and inter-state commerce? How about controls on hunting, fishing, pollution? The near extermination of the buffalo, whales, and the horrors of Love Canal cannot be considered responsible expressions of Freedom of any kind.
The function of government is to protect the rights of all and establish restrictive guidelines to draw boundaries where individual rights infringe on the rights of others.
However, when the government itself oversteps its powers it may also be held accountable. We do this by elections on a regular basis, thus preventing the government establishment of a dictatorial or fascist rule. But when this process is perverted by powerful influences, such as Big Money, there is need for reviewing the concept of money being “free speech”. It might well be called “undue influence”.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 October 2010 12:05 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6094
Joined  2009-02-26
Ruat Caelum - 16 October 2010 07:22 PM

So I’ll wait for your class-action suit against casinos.

You don’t sound very libertarian to me.

People have a right to dump their money down whatever statistically illogical pipe they like. Even if religion becomes involved.

Or are you against the banking and real estate markets now too? wink

-RC

No you cannot burn or dump money down a pipe. It is NOT your money. It is a government backed voucher for exchanging values that could otherwise not be exchanged conveniently. You cannot burn your house, because it might be a danger to neighbors.
The function of government is very much involved in people’s daily lives. That is what we elect them to do. Why have a “government” if not for regulating federal, state social standards and inter-state commerce? How about controls on hunting, fishing, pollution? The near extermination of the buffalo, whales, and the horrors of Love Canal cannot be considered responsible expressions of Freedom of any kind.
The function of government is to protect the rights of all and establish restrictive guidelines to draw boundaries where individual rights infringe on the rights of others.
Where to government oversteps its own boundaries it is also subject to the same priciple. This is why we have regular elections. It prevents the establishment of Fascism and dictatorships.
But when this elecxtoral process itself becomes corrupted by the infusion of Big Money, then we are also forced to review the concept of money as “free speech”. One might replace the term with “undue influence”.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 2
1