RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II.

RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

kittinSol -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:09:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Who gets to define what is responsible free speech and what is irresponsible? When you start making that distinction then aren't you by the very definition limiting free speech? Isn't this what legislators are for?

kittinSol -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:11:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Hate monger. Isn't that a little out of order? It seems like you're getting emotional over this, when a cool head is required: after all, if I manage to stay calm... anybody else can, trust me. ~ crematoriumslut

MadRabbit -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:12:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Hate monger. Isn't that a little out of order? It seems like you're getting emotional over this, when a cool head is required: after all, if I manage to stay calm... anybody else can, trust me. ~ crematoriumslut I was just joking.

giveeverything -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:12:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Who gets to define what is responsible free speech and what is irresponsible? When you start making that distinction then aren't you by the very definition limiting free speech? Isn't this what legislators are for? Kcat, I think this is a slippery slop. Personally, I've always had mixed feelings about "hate crime" initiatives. However, as someone who lived in a long-term lesbian relationship, I decided that we can do away with hate crimes as soon as people stop commiting them (you know, don't beat up people just because they're gay, instead beat them up because you're drunk and they made a pass at the person you had your eye on -- that's a joke for anyone who didn't recognkize it). So really, the responsibility is on the peole who hate, the day you stop turning that into bad actions is the day hate crimes will go away.

giveeverything -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:13:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Hate monger. Isn't that a little out of order? It seems like you're getting emotional over this, when a cool head is required: after all, if I manage to stay calm... anybody else can, trust me. ~ crematoriumslut I was just joking. Hmmmm.... so it is still okay to joke? Good to know.

kittinSol -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:14:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Hate monger. Isn't that a little out of order? It seems like you're getting emotional over this, when a cool head is required: after all, if I manage to stay calm... anybody else can, trust me. ~ crematoriumslut I was just joking. It didn't look like that way from where I was; indeed, it looked just like the opposite. Perhaps it's your style that's not humourous, I don't know...

MadRabbit -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:15:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: giveeverything Hmmmm.... so it is still okay to joke? Good to know. As long as you don't have your way with free speech where statements that can be either taken as a joke or a racial slur are not censored and restricted, then joking will be okay.

giveeverything -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:15:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol It didn't look like that way from where I was; indeed, it looked just like the opposite. Perhaps it's your style that's not humourous, I don't know... He set up a straw man argument (as if I called him a hate monger) and attempting to pass it as legitamate debate. Straw men arguements are usually emotional.

MadRabbit -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:19:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: giveeverything quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol It didn't look like that way from where I was; indeed, it looked just like the opposite. Perhaps it's your style that's not humourous, I don't know... He set up a straw man argument (as if I called him a hate monger) and attempting to pass it as legitamate debate. Straw men arguements are usually emotional. I gave up on having legitimate debate with you a few pages ago. I'm just mostly making fun of your contradictions now.

kittinSol -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:20:42 AM)
I'm still amazed that those people that suffer the least from racial hatred - I leave out individuals' experience of "I was told I was a cracker!" - are the first to cry 'foul' when it's suggested things are done to try and curtail it. The emotional involvement is immense, it seems to me, when in fact they have their cake and eat it. Why is that?

rulemylife -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:22:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterVirago Now, was the crime a hate crime? Maybe or maybe not, the details will need to be sorted out by investigators. Is it protected by Freedom of Speech, absolutely not. No matter how much you want it to be. Honestly, it amazes me. How can a community of people who are considered almost more taboo than homosexuality in some area of the country, be so closed-minded and bigoted? You seem to leap to a couple of unwarranted conclusions. The first being that it is not protected speech though you offer no reasoning other than your statement that it is not. The second being that those who believe it is are acting out of prejudice and bias, which I personally find insulting.

giveeverything -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:22:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit quote: ORIGINAL: giveeverything quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol It didn't look like that way from where I was; indeed, it looked just like the opposite. Perhaps it's your style that's not humourous, I don't know... He set up a straw man argument (as if I called him a hate monger) and attempting to pass it as legitamate debate. Straw men arguements are usually emotional. I gave up on having legitimate debate with you a few pages ago. I'm just mostly making fun of your contradictions now. Yup, that's the spirit.

Stephann -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:23:52 AM)
And as a brief, completely unrelated issue: anyone else find that when they're the last post on the page, they never get replied to?

rulemylife -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:26:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Who gets to define what is responsible free speech and what is irresponsible? When you start making that distinction then aren't you by the very definition limiting free speech? Isn't this what legislators are for? No, that's what the Constitution is for. You can't pick and choose free speech like oranges in a market. Either you have it, and accept the bad with the good, or you don't.

giveeverything -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:26:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol I'm still amazed that those people that suffer the least from racial hatred - I leave out individuals' experience of "I was told I was a cracker!" - are the first to cry 'foul' when it's suggested things are done to try and curtail it. The emotional involvement is immense, it seems to me, when in fact they have their cake and eat it. Why is that? Honestly, it's hard for a person to maintain their priviledged position if they recognized the institutional nature of the privledge position. I think in retrospect I should have stuck to my guns on my personal creed -- issues of predjudice should always be turned on their head by talking about issues of priviledge (how is it that I maintain my particular position in the world? Is it ever at the expense of someone else, if so, how?). That really is the issue to be addressed. Continuing to discuss racism (through hate crime leg or what have you) will always be too limiting. But, that's the way the cookie crumbles.

kittinSol -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:26:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife The second being that those who believe it is are acting out of prejudice and bias, which I personally find insulting. Remember that this is the country where McCarthy conducted a witch hunt for thought crime with political ramifications that still exist today - where were the free speech advocates when it came to this? I cannot help but have a feeling that the balance is tilted.

MadRabbit -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:27:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: giveeverything Yup, that's the spirit. It's more constructive then pages of talking over people's heads with like-minded zealots, reducing their viewpoints down to whatever gibberish interpretation that makes you feel better while passive aggressively avoiding directly responding to the opponents questions and opinions. At least, anything I have wanted to say to you or about your opinions I've said in direct response to one of your statements and not indirectly via condescending, self righteous dialog with someone who agrees with me.

giveeverything -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:28:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit quote: ORIGINAL: giveeverything Yup, that's the spirit. It's more constructive then pages of talking over people's heads with like-minded zealots, reducing their viewpoints down to whatever gibberish interpretation that makes you feel better while passive aggressively avoiding directly responding to the opponents questions and opinions. At least, anything I have wanted to say to you or about your opinions I've said in direct response to one of your statements and not indirectly via condescending, self righteous dialog with someone who agrees with me. I might point out that that is BS. Good luck with that though. Edited to add: you got tweaked by a joke I made (you're welcome to call me on if you thought it was in bad taste) and have been passive aggressive ever since.

kittinSol -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:28:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Either you have it, and accept the bad with the good, or you don't. Would you argue that there is no freedom of speech in the United Kingdom?

JustDarkness -> RE: Is it a hate crime? Part II. (10/30/2008 10:35:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit quote: ORIGINAL: JustDarkness quote: If we have censorship, then it's no longer free speech. there is a middle way also Overhere you can say anything..unless it keeps continuing... damaging people with out proof free speech is propably not meant as....hurting some one so it effects him in a negative way That's called "slander" and its a far cry from what we are talking about here. Nobody is suggesting that "lying" should not have consequences or spreading misinformation is okay. This is about opinion. "Barrack Obama should not be president, because he murdered a small child" is not the same thing as "I think Barrack Obama should be hung, because he's black." "I think Barrack Obama should be hung, because he's black" is an opinion. It's an idea. It's a thought. It's a puff of air from my vocal cords. It's not a fact that can be either true or false. It just simply "is". The last time I checked opinions and ideas don't hurt people. It's actions thats do. If someone attempts to hurt Barrack Obama, they should be punished for their actions, not the thoughts that came before the action. Once we start punishing people for having thoughts and expressing them without taking those thoughts to actions, then say goodbye to a free society. Living in a society where I can go to jail for "inciting rape" simply because I thought and said out loud "Man, VivaciousSub is hot. I would love to throw her down and..." is a pretty scary place. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech the systeem in the USA seems similar as that overhere freedom of speech..unless you do harm

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875