White college student suspended and banned for 2 years for saying black females aren't attractive

again false ..
there is no one size fits all set of ethics

Isn't the "daws" in your ID related to Professional Christian hater and persecutor Richard Dawkins?

While you support the crushing of free speech, all civil liberty really, it strains credulity for you to claim that you would not react were those whom you so hate to do what was done here, with your support.
1. nope you are full of shit as always,Richard Dawkins is a great scientist and has never said he hatred Christians.
my reaction would be the same no matter what the person's faith he fucked up now he has to face the consequences .
you like most conservatives can't or don't understand that free speech is not saying whatever the hell you like, with no thought to what might happen.
as to the crushing free speech and civil liberty ,it's a classic example of your delusional mindset.


cre·du·li·ty
[krəˈd(y)o͞olədē]

NOUN
  1. a tendency to be too ready to believe that something is real or true
that's a spot on definition of you .. believing any and all bullshit that that you encounter.
 
attractiveness is subjective .
fact is there are medusa ugly women of every "race" blacks have no monopoly on "what's ugly and what's not .
if they did some of you would bitch that they were getting special treatment.

I realize that you of the left reject science, particularly biology and anthropology, but attractiveness is determined by genetics. We have evolved to find those who look similar to ourselves attractive. Humans are social animals, and this trait ensures the survival of the clan and community. It is an evolutionary trigger that causes white women to be more attractive to white men than other demographics. In our insane destruction of culture, this mechanism has been attacked, but such attack is silly and ignore scientific fact, as is the way of the left.
unhinged the best pseudo science bullshit spewer on the site.
you must write for storm front.
 
Private College. The first amendment applies to the government.
No. Freedom of speech applies to EVERYONE.
false.


Are there any limits to free speech in the United States?
Answered by: Bernard, An Expert in the Your Rights Category

What are the limits to free speech? Under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the right of free speech is broad and guaranteed to all. This Amendment prohibits the federal government from abridging this right, and the U.S. Supreme Court in modern times has interpreted the First Amendment as also limiting the ability of state and local governments to regulate speech expression.

At the same time, the courts have interpreted the meaning of free speech in a manner that allows government to regulate and limit free speech in a variety of ways.

First, certain kinds of contents has been ruled to have either more limited protection, or in some cases, no protection at all. Among unprotected categories of speech are pornography (obscenity), child pornography, “fighting words,” and incitement to imminent violent action, such as threats to kill an individual.

Pornography, while difficult to define, essentially involves expression designed to appeal to an individual’s sexual arousal, without redeeming social, artistic, political, literary, or scientific value. Additionally, the legal test for what is obscene, and therefore can be prohibited, is based on contemporary standards in a local community, which is a troubling standard to apply today, when adult material is distributed worldwide via the Internet.

Child pornography can be outlawed regardless of its particular content or supposed literary merit, because it involves the depiction of sexual acts by a child. The rationale is the protection of the children so depicted, and the need to protect other children from the harm they would suffer from being depicted in similar pornography by imposing sanctions on those producing or purchasing such materials, in order to diminish the market demand for it.

Commercial speech and speech that constitutes libel or slander are provided with a lesser level of protection. Commercial speech can be regulated to make sure that it is not misleading or fraudulent, and defamation, while it can’t be prohibited outright, can subject a speaker or author to a lawsuit for damages. “Indecent” speech may face particular restrictions when minors are exposed to it, and this has resulted in the regulation of indecent expression in broadcasting.
Second, even clearly protected speech can be regulated in the sense of being subject to content neutral time, place, and manner restrictions. A speaker has the right, for example, to express his disapproval of his congressional representative’s position on taxation, but a city can lawfully enact an ordinance preventing him from doing so at 2 a.m. using a loud bullhorn in a residential neighborhood.

speech also often incorporates actions as well as pure expression, such as demonstrating and picketing. Expressive conduct of this sort can also be subject to reasonable regulations, such as permit requirements. And the right to pass out leaflets does not exempt an individual, on the basis of their right to free speech, from laws prohibiting littering.

Such time, place, and manner regulations of free speech must be content neutral, which means that the regulations must be applied to both proponents and opponents of a particular point of view on controversial subjects like abortion, gay marriage, particular wars, etc.

There are a myriad of other permissible ways in which limits to free speech are imposed. Still, all things considered, the legal system in the United States does allow for a remarkable amount of free expression.


YoExpert.com | Are there any limits to free speech in the United States?

you must enjoy being an ignorant fuck.
 
attractiveness is subjective .
fact is there are medusa ugly women of every "race" blacks have no monopoly on "what's ugly and what's not .
if they did some of you would bitch that they were getting special treatment.

I realize that you of the left reject science, particularly biology and anthropology, but attractiveness is determined by genetics. We have evolved to find those who look similar to ourselves attractive. Humans are social animals, and this trait ensures the survival of the clan and community. It is an evolutionary trigger that causes white women to be more attractive to white men than other demographics. In our insane destruction of culture, this mechanism has been attacked, but such attack is silly and ignore scientific fact, as is the way of the left.

I guess that makes it all the more strange that white women stay on the lookout for Black men.
it's a given that unhinged like the op is ignorant of reality' he's just better at covering it up.
 
if they can get banned for insulting black females, (two years), then what would be the ban for calling all cows "Fat"? a two month suspension?
 
well i would like to announce to all 250 Million legal Americans that I firmly believe that 75% of all men in France and parts of Canada are gay!!,,,well? am i going to be suspended from my home for two years?
 
what about college students who weigh over 325 pounds, god forbid anyone forms a public opinion on their size and joke about where they go out to eat.
 
that "White College Student" should of said that he thought that Nancy Pelosi looks like the tasmainian devil without make-up, then that would of made news and then Nancy Pelosi would of have to make a public statement.
 

"Uhura" Star Trek alt timeline. Case closed. :)

zoe-saldana-star-trek-hair-.jpg


Talk about lighting up a room.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top