Which would you prefer?

[TNHarley]

Emotion has no place in policy making. Emotion is left to the INDIVIDUAL not the GOVT
I will ask AGAIN, would you like to discuss history or continue your regressive rhetoric? I can come up with all kinds of examples of how emotion and tyranny isnt the route we should take. Can you do the same for your beliefs?

TN, you were referring to a student's post to social media. You said words only hurt if you let them. I disagree that words have no impact, are not hurtful. We were NOT talking about policy here.
If you want to talk about emotion and tyranny, what do you call the swill the neo-Nazi's and KKK types are spewing? If I can't use it, why can they?

No, words do hurt some people. But that is their own fault.
Use what? I dont follow the second part.

You said emotion and tyranny has no place in policy making and called it regressive rhetoric. You said emotion and tyranny -- my stance -- isn't the route we should take.
So if it's not okay for me, why is it okay for them?

The KKK and NAZIs make policy?

They'd sure as hell like to; what do you think they're proposing?

are you trying to say i support them or something? Im trying to figure out where you are going with this.

 

[bendog]

No it's not.

you're just a coward so you twisted the choices around, you don't support free speech, just the speech the echoes your own thoughts.

Nonsense - the LAST thing I want is everyone speak in terms that echo my own speech & thoughts.

however you are unwilling to vote that racist have free speech, like you and everyone else.

I recall I stopped giving money to the ACLU when they supported forcing a city to give the Klan a parade permit. I don't object to the Klan voicing their hate, but I objected to cops having to protect them and taxpayers paying for it.

And we revisited that issue when Trump's "good people" created riots in the city where my kid is in school.

Where you upset when antifa started riots and attacked people when they came our of buildings?
where you upset when hillary supporters attacked trump supporters?

where you cool with the cops being order to not stop the violence?


I'm basically calling you a fucking hypocrite, since the left openly supported these actions and not one thread came out otherwise.

Well, I'm calling you a fucking asshole racist. As for Antifa, the Klan came first to Charlottesville. Shove your statue up your ass.

 

[TNHarley]

No it's not.

you're just a coward so you twisted the choices around, you don't support free speech, just the speech the echoes your own thoughts.

Nonsense - the LAST thing I want is everyone speak in terms that echo my own speech & thoughts.

however you are unwilling to vote that racist have free speech, like you and everyone else.

I recall I stopped giving money to the ACLU when they supported forcing a city to give the Klan a parade permit. I don't object to the Klan voicing their hate, but I objected to cops having to protect them and taxpayers paying for it.

And we revisited that issue when Trump's "good people" created riots in the city where my kid is in school.

Where you upset when antifa started riots and attacked people when they came our of buildings?
where you upset when hillary supporters attacked trump supporters?

where you cool with the cops being order to not stop the violence?


I'm basically calling you a fucking hypocrite, since the left openly supported these actions and not one thread came out otherwise.

Well, I'm calling you a fucking asshole racist. As for Antifa, the Klan came first to Charlottesville. Shove your statue up your ass.

Dude, you said earlier certain people should be given the same rights as others simply because of their beliefs. You are a bigot. Not much difference.

 

[DrLove]

Well, I'm calling you a fucking asshole racist. As for Antifa, the Klan came first to Charlottesville. Shove your statue up your ass.

The old AntiFa distraction is to be expected from these rubes. I don't know of ANYONE currently in this forum who has defended their actions.

 

[bendog]

No it's not.

you're just a coward so you twisted the choices around, you don't support free speech, just the speech the echoes your own thoughts.

Nonsense - the LAST thing I want is everyone speak in terms that echo my own speech & thoughts.

however you are unwilling to vote that racist have free speech, like you and everyone else.

I recall I stopped giving money to the ACLU when they supported forcing a city to give the Klan a parade permit. I don't object to the Klan voicing their hate, but I objected to cops having to protect them and taxpayers paying for it.

And we revisited that issue when Trump's "good people" created riots in the city where my kid is in school.

So you think only certain people should be defended by our govt?
You sir, are fucked up. And selfish as hell. A regressive, if you will.

No I don't think any group should get a parade permit if the intent is to incite civil unrest. The purpose for the Klan march that I referred to, and the one in Charlottesville, was for a minority of people to gather together as a mob and attack other people. I don't see why govt should have to facilitate that because it is not "speech."

 

[Mac1958]

Finally someone voted for authoritarian government control of speech.

THANK YOU.

I wish more here would be so forthcoming.
.

 

[TNHarley]

Finally someone voted for authoritarian government control of speech.

THANK YOU.

I wish more here would be so forthcoming.
.

The bad thing is, he didnt mean it :/

 

[Mac1958]

Finally someone voted for authoritarian government control of speech. THANK YOU. I wish more here would be so forthcoming..

The bad thing is, he didnt mean it :/

CRAP

STILL WAITING THEN
.

 

[TNHarley]

No it's not.

you're just a coward so you twisted the choices around, you don't support free speech, just the speech the echoes your own thoughts.

Nonsense - the LAST thing I want is everyone speak in terms that echo my own speech & thoughts.

however you are unwilling to vote that racist have free speech, like you and everyone else.

I recall I stopped giving money to the ACLU when they supported forcing a city to give the Klan a parade permit. I don't object to the Klan voicing their hate, but I objected to cops having to protect them and taxpayers paying for it.

And we revisited that issue when Trump's "good people" created riots in the city where my kid is in school.

So you think only certain people should be defended by our govt?
You sir, are fucked up. And selfish as hell. A regressive, if you will.

No I don't think any group should get a parade permit if the intent is to incite civil unrest. The purpose for the Klan march that I referred to, and the one in Charlottesville, was for a minority of people to gather together as a mob and attack other people. I don't see why govt should have to facilitate that because it is not "speech."

Can you prove that intent, or are you assuming?

 

[OldLady]

You know, it's absolutely amazing that everyone of you here no doubt supports taking down Jihadi websites that teach hatred and destruction for America/nonbelievers. Their crap ideology is hurtful. Do you think, based on what racists and Nazi's have done to blacks and Jews in the past that they aren't capable of being hurtful to the groups they hate?
If it threatens YOU it's all fine and dandy to shut it down, even hunt it down more aggressively than anything I would propose. Yet as long as it's not something that personally affects you, by all means let's not shut it down.
We have the responsibility as Americans committed to a free and equal society to treat our citizens as free and equal and public discourse that opposes that is not responsible. No one should be arrested for it and in their private lives they can say what they like. I see no more reason to permit it in public discourse than Jihadi rhetoric.

 

[TNHarley]

You know, it's absolutely amazing that everyone of you here no doubt supports taking down Jihadi websites that teach hatred and destruction for America/nonbelievers. Their crap ideology is hurtful. Do you think, based on what racists and Nazi's have done to blacks and Jews in the past that they aren't capable of being hurtful to the groups they hate?
If it threatens YOU it's all fine and dandy to shut it down, even hunt it down more aggressively than anything I would propose. Yet as long as it's not something that personally affects you, by all means let's not shut it down.
We have the responsibility as Americans committed to a free and equal society to treat our citizens as free and equal and public discourse that opposes that is not responsible. No one should be arrested for it and in their private lives they can say what they like. I see no more reason to permit it in public discourse than Jihadi rhetoric.

so, basically, we will all be like you when our emotion gets involved
LOL thanks.

 

[OldLady]

You know, it's absolutely amazing that everyone of you here no doubt supports taking down Jihadi websites that teach hatred and destruction for America/nonbelievers. Their crap ideology is hurtful. Do you think, based on what racists and Nazi's have done to blacks and Jews in the past that they aren't capable of being hurtful to the groups they hate?
If it threatens YOU it's all fine and dandy to shut it down, even hunt it down more aggressively than anything I would propose. Yet as long as it's not something that personally affects you, by all means let's not shut it down.
We have the responsibility as Americans committed to a free and equal society to treat our citizens as free and equal and public discourse that opposes that is not responsible. No one should be arrested for it and in their private lives they can say what they like. I see no more reason to permit it in public discourse than Jihadi rhetoric.

so, basically, we will all be like you when our emotion gets involved
LOL thanks.

Thanks a lot for at least recognizing my point. Not.

 

[TNHarley]

You know, it's absolutely amazing that everyone of you here no doubt supports taking down Jihadi websites that teach hatred and destruction for America/nonbelievers. Their crap ideology is hurtful. Do you think, based on what racists and Nazi's have done to blacks and Jews in the past that they aren't capable of being hurtful to the groups they hate?
If it threatens YOU it's all fine and dandy to shut it down, even hunt it down more aggressively than anything I would propose. Yet as long as it's not something that personally affects you, by all means let's not shut it down.
We have the responsibility as Americans committed to a free and equal society to treat our citizens as free and equal and public discourse that opposes that is not responsible. No one should be arrested for it and in their private lives they can say what they like. I see no more reason to permit it in public discourse than Jihadi rhetoric.

so, basically, we will all be like you when our emotion gets involved
LOL thanks.

Thanks a lot for at least recognizing my point. Not.

If that wasnt your point, then was it we should only be able to speak our minds when no one is around?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Baloney. Free speech rights are the rights to speech and NOT be punished for it. You're talking nonsense.

You have the right to rent a billboard along a busy freeway with your picture on it with the message:

"Hi. I am NYCarbineer. I work for Toyota, but I hate those bastards. Those slant-eyed Japs build shitty cars. Don't buy Toyota autos."

Would Toyota be "punishing" you for your free speech if they fired you?

No. Toyota would be getting rid of an employee who is fucking up their business. HUGE difference.

So if your company fired you for owning a gun that's no violation of your right to own a gun?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Finally someone voted for authoritarian government control of speech. THANK YOU. I wish more here would be so forthcoming..

The bad thing is, he didnt mean it :/

CRAP

STILL WAITING THEN
.

Macmuffin believes that you're a regressive if you don't believe that a racist should have the right to call in a bomb threat to a black church.

Seriously reprehensible.

 

[Mac1958]

Macmuffin believes that you're a regressive if you don't believe that a racist should have the right to call in a bomb threat to a black church. Seriously reprehensible.

And USMB's King of the Straw Man is back.


.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Macmuffin believes that you're a regressive if you don't believe that a racist should have the right to call in a bomb threat to a black church. Seriously reprehensible.

And USMB's King of the Straw Man is back.


.

Tell me EXACTLY what you disagree with of what I've said on the topic of this thread.

 

[Mac1958]

Macmuffin believes that you're a regressive if you don't believe that a racist should have the right to call in a bomb threat to a black church. Seriously reprehensible.

And USMB's King of the Straw Man is back.


.

Tell me EXACTLY what you disagree with of what I've said on the topic of this thread.

Are you admitting that you just tried a straw man, and that I shoved it in your face?

If you will admit that, we can continue.
.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Baloney. Free speech rights are the rights to speech and NOT be punished for it. You're talking nonsense.

You have the right to rent a billboard along a busy freeway with your picture on it with the message:

"Hi. I am NYCarbineer. I work for Toyota, but I hate those bastards. Those slant-eyed Japs build shitty cars. Don't buy Toyota autos."

Would Toyota be "punishing" you for your free speech if they fired you?

No. Toyota would be getting rid of an employee who is fucking up their business. HUGE difference.

Yes, they would be punishing me for my speech because they would be taking the view that my speech was not good for their business.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Macmuffin believes that you're a regressive if you don't believe that a racist should have the right to call in a bomb threat to a black church. Seriously reprehensible.

And USMB's King of the Straw Man is back.


.

Tell me EXACTLY what you disagree with of what I've said on the topic of this thread.

Are you admitting that you just tried a straw man, and that I shoved it in your face?

If you will admit that, we can continue.
.

No, I'm pointing out that you called me your lame pet prejorative 'regressive' because I've taken the position that free speech should not be unlimited.