Originally posted by PVS
no, i just refuse to accept a kernal of true belief buried under a pile of PC excrement.
if a post reeks of the classic "if we tolerate gays as well allow a man to screw his dog" arguement, then i will call it out. dont like it? well im not here to please you, so whatever 🙂
What I don't like is your hypocrisy in criticizing me for 'assuming' your beliefs and then turning around and doing the same thing to him.
i have the ability to put 2 and 2 together.
as do most including yourself, i hope.
i also have the ability to blurt out my own prejudice and
then backpedal to cover it up, i just choose not to. i even
have the ability to forsake the blatent truth simply to defend someone
with like views and to take a jab at another member who i just dont like,
but i choose not to 🙂
i know what i read, and you know it too. crying about it wont change that.
if the assumption is correct, i will state it.
and it is correct. you know it.
and before you post more BS, just take a moment,
put that big heavy ego away for a second, and privately acklowledge that.
no need to admit to me, just to yourself 🙂
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
I mean, this isn't as simple as tv censorship by adults or simply changing the channel if it offends you; it's right in your face on the road. If I had a license plate that read something like Bestiality is Okay, or Rape is Okay, or something along those lines, (With the justification that it is natural, rooted in my genetic code and how I feel) and it -wasn't- challenged by a court, I would question the morality of the country I was living in.But then again, what do I know?
*cough*freedomofspeech*cough*
Originally posted by PVS
i have the ability to put 2 and 2 together.
as do most including yourself, i hope.
i also have the ability to blurt out my own prejudice and
then backpedal to cover it up, i just choose not to. i even
have the ability to forsake the blatent truth simply to defend someone
with like views and to take a jab at another member who i just dont like,
but i choose not to 🙂i know what i read, and you know it too. crying about it wont change that.
if the assumption is correct, i will state it.
and it is correct. you know it.
and before you post more BS, just take a moment,
put that big heavy ego away for a second, and privately acklowledge that.
no need to admit to me, just to yourself 🙂
But you know what really pisses me off? You know what really pushes my buttons (per se)?
If the situation was the exact opposite and the license plate said 'GAYZSUX', people here would most certainly not be defending Kthe individual's right to express him or herself. They wouldn't be talking about how the court had no right to intervene or pass judgment.
If the court were to deem the license plate inappropriate and make the person who had it change it, everyone on KMC would be happy and cheerful that some bastard got what he deserved, that 'justice' was done.
If the court were to come to the decision they did in this case, everyone on KMC would start ranting about homophobia, bigotry, prejudice, and, in the words of the king of Siam, etc., etc., etc.
Originally posted by FeceManIf the situation was the exact opposite and the license plate said 'GAYZSUX', people here would most certainly not be defending Kthe individual's right to express him or herself. They wouldn't be talking about how the court had no right to intervene or pass judgment.
Um...I believe that I did just that, and I'm on the other side of the fence here.
Originally posted by FeceMan
I'm sorry, PVS, but this isn't a matter of the ego.But you know what really pisses me off? You know what really pushes my buttons (per se)?
If the situation was the exact opposite and the license plate said 'GAYZSUX', people here would most certainly not be defending Kthe individual's right to express him or herself. They wouldn't be talking about how the court had no right to intervene or pass judgment.
If the court were to deem the license plate inappropriate and make the person who had it change it, everyone on KMC would be happy and cheerful that some bastard got what he deserved, that 'justice' was done.
If the court were to come to the decision they did in this case, everyone on KMC would start ranting about homophobia, bigotry, prejudice, and, in the words of the king of Siam, etc., etc., etc.
what ticks me off is how people are so ready to defend hate speach,
but cant stand the idea of tolerance. 😬
why is it that the idea of tolerance of those who hurt nobody is paralleled to hate crimes, rape, etc.? is that the only way people can rest assured in that they somehow re-rationalised their hatred of gays, so that it seems kinder and gentler? as if its somehow an upholding of decency to prevent the support of those they find to be disgraceful, rather than directly attack those they hate for no good reason?
i guess its a better alternative to violence and harrassment, but its still very shitty
Originally posted by UshgarakI agree. I have nothing against voicing you opinion and I think you should be allowed to put bumper stickers on your car that support a certain cause you believe in, but the state has every right to refuse to make "gay pride" liscence plates. It wouldn't necessarily be them being bigots they are just trying to avoid controversy.
This is remarkably simple.If Utah produces the plates, then it is doing so in the name of a public service.
A public service has absolutely no place taking a stand against any LEGAL practice or system. The right of gays to assert their pride is in law; the defamatory nature of attacking gays is also in law.
Therefore the Utah state had no business in challening this plate and would also have no business allowing one that sais Gays suck.
Originally posted by Afro Cheese
I agree. I have nothing against voicing you opinion and I think you should be allowed to put bumper stickers on your car that support a certain cause you believe in, but the state has every right to refuse to make "gay pride" liscence plates. It wouldn't necessarily be them being bigots they are just trying to avoid controversy.
Again.
Freedom of ****in' speech. 😐
Well, I suppose my words didn't help mny viewpoint much, and coming under fire from someone else who seemed to only focus on certain sentences... well... What should I expect? This is the internet. Everyone's a logician/bully/smartass.
My comparisons were poor, I admit it. I was multitasking at the time, at work, and I wasn't thinking on all four or six cylinders. Take that for what you will. But my poor reasoning at the moment shouldn't undermine my entire take on the situation, nor anyone else who agrees with me.
I think I'll die if someone actually reads that and comments on it. Seems most people just browse, find something they disagree with, and quote it with some one liner... like "freedom of speech", as if that were the answer to this entire problem.
Now...
By allowing a plate that says GAYSROK, they're allowing freedom of speech, to say it's okay. But since not every thinks that that is okay... It should be EQUALLY acceptable to have, for instance GAYSRWRONG or something like that. (Read this: I'm not arguing about that from personal viewpoint... Read carefully as I try to make a point). That, however, seems to follow under narrow-mindedness and hatred. So it can't be legally and morally acceptable, correct?
So why the hell can you say something is right with a state issued license plate and that's acceptable, while at the same time having your own opinion and saying it's wrong is not? Listen folks, if you preach equality you have to be equal on both sides. If you cannot have a license plate displaying a message that is negative, why have one that is positive? That's taking sides, and it's not equal protection under the freedom of speech that people champion so much.
And it's not just the issue of gays, (Which would best be described as a view on a lifestyle in this case) it's in the issue of anything... If one person can have a JESUS LUVS U plate or whatever, there should also be one that says the opposite. But then, that would offend some too, wouldn't it?
The right thing to do (for society) would be to oppose it on ground of maintaining neutrality... It's not about my views on gays or yours... This isn't an issue of hatred (Although some will say it is)... It's an issue of free speech, its limitations, and equality (the latter which is paramount in this country from its creation.)
There, I hope that was better said then my earlier ramblings.
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
Well, I suppose my words didn't help mny viewpoint much, and coming under fire from someone else who seemed to only focus on certain sentences... well... What should I expect? This is the internet. Everyone's a logician/bully/smartass.My comparisons were poor, I admit it. I was multitasking at the time, at work, and I wasn't thinking on all four or six cylinders. Take that for what you will. But my poor reasoning at the moment shouldn't undermine my entire take on the situation, nor anyone else who agrees with me.
I think I'll die if someone actually reads that and comments on it. Seems most people just browse, find something they disagree with, and quote it with some one liner... like "freedom of speech", as if that were the answer to this entire problem.
Now...
By allowing a plate that says GAYSROK, they're allowing freedom of speech, to say it's okay. But since not every thinks that that is okay... It should be EQUALLY acceptable to have, for instance GAYSRWRONG or something like that. (Read this: I'm not arguing about that from personal viewpoint... Read carefully as I try to make a point). That, however, seems to follow under narrow-mindedness and hatred. So it can't be legally and morally acceptable, correct?
So why the hell can you say something is right with a state issued license plate and that's acceptable, while at the same time having your own opinion and saying it's wrong is not? Listen folks, if you preach equality you have to be equal on both sides. If you cannot have a license plate displaying a message that is negative, why have one that is positive? That's taking sides, and it's not equal protection under the freedom of speech that people champion so much.
And it's not just the issue of gays, (Which would best be described as a view on a lifestyle in this case) it's in the issue of anything... If one person can have a JESUS LUVS U plate or whatever, there should also be one that says the opposite. But then, that would offend some too, wouldn't it?
The right thing to do (for society) would be to oppose it on ground of maintaining neutrality... It's not about my views on gays or yours... This isn't an issue of hatred (Although some will say it is)... It's an issue of free speech, its limitations, and equality (the latter which is paramount in this country from its creation.)
There, I hope that was better said then my earlier ramblings.
This isn't Buddhism. The middle path isn't the most enlightened.
Originally posted by PVS
what ticks me off is how people are so ready to defend hate speach,
but cant stand the idea of tolerance. 😬why is it that the idea of tolerance of those who hurt nobody is paralleled to hate crimes, rape, etc.? is that the only way people can rest assured in that they somehow re-rationalised their hatred of gays, so that it seems kinder and gentler? as if its somehow an upholding of decency to prevent the support of those they find to be disgraceful, rather than directly attack those they hate for no good reason?
i guess its a better alternative to violence and harrassment, but its still very shitty
That's why I despise the ultra-tolerance pushed on us.
Hate speech? Is it not hate speech to speak hatreds towards racists? Or people who hate homosexuals? To insult them is the same as insulting blacks or Jews or gays.
But it is considered okay if they don't fit in with what the general public believe. The intolerance towards people who are intolerant is a-OK.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
This isn't Buddhism. The middle path isn't the most enlightened.
Well the state still has the right to censor liscence plates.. why wouldn't they, it's their product isn't it? I don't see why you people think that it's absolutely necessary for people to be able to have whatever they want written on their vanity plates. It's not telling people they can't put gay's rights stuff on their cars, it's just saying that they aren't going to write it on liscence plates.
Originally posted by Afro Cheese
Well the state still has the right to censor liscence plates.. why wouldn't they, it's their product isn't it? I don't see why you people think that it's absolutely necessary for people to be able to have whatever they want written on their vanity plates. It's not telling people they can't put gay's rights stuff on their cars, it's just saying that they aren't going to write it on liscence plates.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH!!!