Originally posted by DARTH POWER
He's proving his freedom of speech and freedom to insult and hate.
Yup... When I say there's a significant difference between towelheads and Muslims, blacks and *******, whites and white trash, I'm somehow spouting hate. The fact that you and DE disagree with incredible exaggeration is a testament to the truth of my statement.
So like I said "Freedom" is whatever suits the local bias.
It's not that you could say anything you want. Freedom of speech is not that absolute. It is not meant to incite or revolt. But again, this concept eludes you.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
That's fair enough. As long as it's all around freedom to insult any creed or group you like. Against Jews, Christians, Homosexuals, Women, Colored People e.t.c. and just general freedom to verbally bully. Freedom to be Sexist, Anti-Semitic, Homophobic and so forth.
Certainly. You're also allowed to critique the gov't and politicians, state new and often unpopular ideas and opinions, express ypurself through art however you want, and much more.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
I personally prefer how it is here in the UK. Where you are free to wear what you like, and free to debate and criticize all you like, but lines are drawn when people are just "Insulting" in a way that incites hate.
I don't. As always the problem is where is the line drawn. Os a tastless jpke enough for jail time? how about a fine?
I also think restricting forms of speech you don't like is sorta missing the point of freedom of speech. As far as I'm concerned the less restrictions the better (with some obvious exceptions like child porn).
Originally posted by Nephthys
Not sure why people are defending Beefy's appalling racism but ok.
No one is defending him (at least I'm not).
Originally posted by ares834
Certainly. You're also allowed to critique the gov't and politicians, state new and often unpopular ideas and opinions, express ypurself through art however you want, and much more.I don't. As always the problem is where is the line drawn. Os a tastless jpke enough for jail time? how about a fine?
I also think restricting forms of speech you don't like is sorta missing the point of freedom of speech. As far as I'm concerned the less restrictions the better (with some obvious exceptions like child porn).
No one is defending him (at least I'm not).
Child porn isn't a restriction of free speech, it's a universally agreed upon despicable act and a crime, at least in the civilized world.
Nah, he just meant that here in the UK we don't tolerate that shit and will tell the person to back the **** up if they start with that kind of freshness. If it was illegal to be racist the BNP wouldn't exist. Which would be awesome.
Originally posted by psmith81992
You saying its not racist doesn't make it less racist. But please, explain to me the difference between a black guy or gal and an n-word. I'm sure that's a hoot at parties.
You saying its not racist doesn't make it less racist. But please, explain to me the difference between a black guy or gal and an n-word. I'm sure that's a hoot at parties.
And you saying it's racist doesn't make it racist.
Quoting my opinion on that from the discussion in the GDF:
Originally posted by Tzeentch
It's funny because if he had participated in the march, those same critics would be lambasting him for wasting time, focusing on the affairs of other countries when 'murica has its own problems, etc. I can see the whiny ***** Fox news rant now."I just want to know why the President of the United States is off marching and catching beads in France while important issues at home need addressing!"
I understand that there's symbolism to consider by attending, but frankly everyone knows our stance on extremism. We're the ones who've been bombing the **** out of these guys for over a decade (and eating shit from the rest of the global community for doing so). Obama doesn't need to attend the march to show our solidarity with the cause.