Politics ( ͡° ͜ ʖ ͡°)

#443

You may not be able to watch this video, but here’s what I believe to be an apt explanation on the topic

oh shit, really? I really don’t like the sound of that then

#444

Ok, thx for pointing that out. I see what you mean.

#445

Do you believe that people are fine with being insulted as long as it exposes racists/bigots?

#446

No. Because racism/bigotry is relative. Therefore, just because you believe you are exposing racism/bigotry does not mean that the person who is being insulted also believes that the same thing is racist or bigotist (???) However, if they do recognize that they are wrong, they may attempt to change even though I doubt that they will initially accept the insult (so they may argue back but in the end, they will try to end whatever is racist/bigotist)

#447

Hate speech cannot and should not be banned because there are gray areas and America is known for free speech. Although things like Anti-Semitism are horrible and evil, hate speech should not be banned. Hate crimes, and excluding someone because of their race/gender is a different story, but hate speech is just that- speech. You can shrug it off, find support, or educate/rebut, but free speech cannot be impeded on. Without free speech, our citizens lose a vital part of their freedom.

#448

What? Isn’t the point of an insult to hurt the one it’s directed at?

Can you clarify what you’re saying here because I don’t understand the question.

#449

Ok first off, why was that response to me? Second off, like all rights, free speech should be restricted if it can cause actual harm to others.In fact, “free speech” is already impeded on in cases of libel or the passing out of certain materials. The catch is that although we all have rights, these rights only exist as long as these rights are not harming others.

#450

oh i was just responding to the last person who wrote something

#451

Do you know what free speech even means?

Free speech means the government can’t censor/punish you for what you say (directly). However, if what you say breaks some law (like making a death threat/harassing someone) you can still be punished for it. In addition, most (if not all) private businesses have the right to remove you from their premises for any reason, or with no reason. So if you brought a swatstika on a flag and started heiling hitler at a mcdonalds, they could ask you to leave. Failure to comply would be trespassing at that point. Hypothetically if you were standing outside a public school, on a public street, holding various hate speech signs you would not be asked to leave unless you posed a threat to said school.

That last point was definitely not influenced by an event that happened at a certain school in California, and is definitely not why I sound salty right now.

#452

Most of the stuff people say about race comes from the XVIIIth or XIXth century. I think there might be a proven psychological bias against people who look different from yourself but it’s not specifically tied to race.

Don’t kid yourself. Racial tensions are very much artificially aggravated to serve as political tools.

It’s still resources and space being spent on religious study, regardless of whether you personally take the classes or not.

In the private sector that’s fine but in public schools that’s definitely not following the principle of separation of church and state.

That’s a weird question. What’s the context behind it?

Biggest issue with hate speech laws is that at best they’re redundant with other laws (on harassment for example) and at worst they’re a tool for censorship.

#453

obviously, and that’s where the line is drawn of course. I’m “fine” with someone saying groupX people are bad because why not, but if they say groupX are bad and we should kill them all, then that’d be illegal because it’s a call to action to commit a crime.

that fall into legality and rationality. because sure, they an remove you if you’re shouting heil hitler or whatever nonsense and being a nuisance in general, but I’m pretty sure they can’t remove you for simply being a nazi or religious, democrat/republican, sexuality, or because of your race, for obvious reasons.

which is how it should be, not being asked to leave obviously, not the part with standing around a school with propaganda like a jackass, that just sounds sad.

#454

Don’t businesses have the right of association? As in, they can remove you for any or no reason?

#455

yeah, but that are within the law. from what I’ve read, it’s illegal to deny service based on 3/5 of the characteristics I listed (race, sexuality, religion), however it’s not really clear for ideology, so I wouldn’t really know for sure.

but in any case, it’s still a dick thing to do, especially if the person hasn’t done anything wrong other than simply being of a specific ideology, and this goes for either side of the political spectrum.

#456

Didn’t the Supreme Court say that that baker had the right to not serve that gay couple?

#457

ye, B uT t it was because of the hostility of the court towards him based on his religious leanings, which I begrudgingly agree with, though I don’t like it. But religion is a protected class for a reason, and there was definite bias when they were dealing with that case, that was obviously against the baker.

Washington post has a decent article on what happened, so I’ll post it here:

it seems like it’s up for debate though, since I do think both sides have goods points.

(that and it’s too morally and legally gray for me to not give a biased opinion for, so this is the best I can do :joy:)

#458

im a few days late but u are not tottaly correct for example if the united states finds a person in ANY OTHER COUNTRY commiting violence toward us or etc they can just deport him to cuba and keep them in military jails there (this has happened many times to innocent ppl such as to a terrorists taxi driver). They can keep people there for as long as they want and have also resorted to extreme measures such as torturing

#460

. we’re talking about America’s free speech laws (or lack thereof)

. brings up someone in a different country

Source? I severely doubt Cuba is friendly enough towards us to take our prisoners.

#461

hate speech doesn’t threaten anyone’s life tho

#462

(I’m assuming you meant to reply to an above post of mine, otherwise this doesn’t have anything to do with my post.)

That’s why the Westboro Baptist Church wasn’t forced to leave, and they were allowed to protest in front of the school.

Although in my opinion you shouldn’t be allowed to stand outside a school with signs that say “God sent the shooter” or “The fire was god punishing the gays” or other signs relevant to recent events that may slightly distract students.

#463

Well, we aren’t mindless robots. That person who is holding up the sign is choosing to do so, but you can also choose to ignore him. Prove that you are the bigger person, and ignore someone who is malicious and obviously has too much time on his hands. Restricting free speech won’t solve anything.

yeah sorry I was talking about the “However, if what you say breaks some law (like making a death threat/harassing someone) you can still be punished for it.”

a death threat won’t kill you. but if you try and kill someone, of course you’ll be punished