Does freedom of speech excuse preaching hate?

@djjd62,

djjd62 wrote:

has anyone mentioned yet that the jews killed christ

wait are we for or against hate speech

That's what Italians claimed, since they didn't want to admit they killed the God they ultimately believed in. The Jews that were involved were the high priests. Read your new testament, "The multitudes rejoiced when He entered Jerusalem." The multitudes were Jews!

0 Replies

@Foofie,

Foofie wrote:

By proselytizing the end of American free speech, one seems to be promulgating anti-American speech. Well, technically not hate speech, but anti-American speech is quite rampant in the Middle East, and is acted out now and then in terrorism. So, one should not think that sort of speech is so benign, in my opinion.

I like this post so much, I will repeat it.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

oralloy wrote:
Actually America does let people like me form and run our foreign policy.

Actually, we don't. You may have noticed that we didn't 'machine-gun' the crowd.

We were unprepared for the riot. That was a grave mistake on our part. But we are now on our guard. We will most certainly fire into another crowd if it is necessary to prevent them from overrunning another embassy.

You may not like the fact that we'll defend ourselves. You many whine and snivel when we defend ourselves. But too bad. We'll still defend ourselves.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

And that we haven't done that in the past when our embassies are stormed, and we won't in the future.

No, if we have to do it to protect our embassy, we will.

You'll likely whine piteously about how horrible it is that we stood up and didn't let the Muslims murder another of our ambassadors, but oh well. Like I said just above, too bad. We'll still do it.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Oralloy wrote:
Neither Obama nor Romney are going to surrender to the Muslims if they win the election.

Both Romney and Obama realize that 'the Muslims' pose no threat to us whatsoever.

Wrong on both counts. Romney would like it if you kept saying that about Obama though.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

We won't surrender to them, because there's nothing to surrender to; no reason to do so.

No, the reason we won't surrender to them is because you're the only one in America who doesn't want us to defend ourselves.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

The only reason you don't realize that, is because you are a paranoid delusionac.

Says the person who denies the reality that the Muslims are attacking us.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

And I maintain that you would cower if you were the one whose life was on the line.

That's because you are so eager for Americans to be massacred that you spend an inordinate amount of time picturing the slaughter.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

It's been my long life experience that the loudest-talking bullies rarely have anything to back their bluster up.

That must be an insinuation that I'm a loud-talking bully.

With that in mind: Liar.

Oh, and as for back up, the United States military is well-able to defend me, no matter how much you might wish it were otherwise.

It's their job. And they do it well.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

If the muslims continue killing us over our determination to live our own lives then war is demanded.

Yes. Exactly.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

You may not like the fact that we'll defend ourselves. You many whine and snivel when we defend ourselves. But too bad. We'll still defend ourselves.

Many??? I think I intended "may even".

Oh well. Wasn't much of an exchange anyway. As if America would ever decide to stop defending ourselves.... Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

hawkeye10 wrote:
If the muslims continue killing us over our determination to live our own lives then war is demanded.

Yes. Exactly.

but according the the A2K brain trust we are whack jobs, so what do we know, right?

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

We seem to do fine over here, freedom of speech shouldn't be about spreading lies and hate.

You ever watch Fox News?

2 Replies

@snood,

Quote:

You ever watch Fox News?

because as we all know anyone who does not agree with your politics is by definition a hate filled liar.....

there is only Snoods way....according to Snood. Drunk

1 Reply

@oralloy,

hawkeye10 wrote:

If the muslims continue killing us over our determination to live our own lives
then war is demanded.

oralloy wrote:

Yes. Exactly.

Ergo, the invasion of Afganistan
and the overthrow of its Taliban.
It remains to be seen whether theocratic totalitarianism will resume,
after our departure.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

Ergo, the invasion of Afganistan

Invading Afghanistan seems to have wide support still and always, it is the invading Iraq and the not taking care of Afghanistan in a timely manor or at all that gets Americans miffed.

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

engineer wrote:

First because I am not familiar with current free speech issues in your country
and second because the stifling effect of your hate speech legislation can't be observed.

izzythepush wrote:

If that's true you can't say it's stifling.

That is incorrect, Izzy.
If Englishmen have been terrorized by your government
dissuaded in dread from giving voice to their concerns,
then definitionally, that is indeed stifling.

David

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

All one needs to do is type in any search engine, FOXNews lies.

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

Did you follow the link I provided?

I'm talking about our law and how it's actually implemented,
not some paranoid imagining of what would happen if some
other "evil government" got their hands on anti-hate legislation.

Lemme get this straight, Izzy.
U deny that your countrymen
deem themselves to be REQUIRED by the law AS WRITTEN to stifle themselves
from addressing designated topics, on pain of legal consequences
(fines? incarcerations? revocations of licensure of any kind?
the rack? other undreamed of penalties?)

izzythepush wrote:

Why don't you show me an actual example
of how our legislation has been misused to stifle opposition.

OK. Let us conceive of a possible 2,OOO,OOO Englishmen
who wanted to be vocal in condemning specific Moslem atrocities,
but that thay remained silent in foreboding anxiety, wringing their hands
qua what misfortunes woud be inflicted upon them by your government,
avenging the Moslems. We know from recent nudity-ridden ignominious events
(wherein thay dared not defend themselves) that the average English in the streets r not very brave.

As the mute tremble in their quiescencent reticence, how
can anyone know of their enstifled surrender?? If thay wave a white flag, will that be deemed hate speech??
Who will attend to their rescue ?

The English woud have acquitted themselves better in earlier centuries.

David

1 Reply

@Foofie,

Foofie wrote:

Foofie wrote:

By proselytizing the end of American free speech, one seems to be promulgating anti-American speech. Well, technically not hate speech, but anti-American speech is quite rampant in the Middle East, and is acted out now and then in terrorism. So, one should not think that sort of speech is so benign, in my opinion.

I like this post so much, I will repeat it.

I know you like the sound of your own voice, doesn't mean it's not a load of old bollocks though. You're incapabable of discussing anything without getting on the defensive. If anyone is proselytising it's you.

Who has said anti-American speech is benign? You're starting to make strawmen arguments again Fluff.

1 Reply

@Irishk,

Irishk wrote:

Again, media in various forms offending all religions abound in the universe and singling out one person for promoting a satirical view of Mohammad (no matter how repulsive)

The thing is, this isn't satire. Satire points out injustice, hypocrisy and usually does so in a humourous manner. At the heart of it there's truth. This grubby film is just intended to insult, and is full of lies.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

That is incorrect, Izzy.
If Englishmen have been terrorized by your government
dissuaded in dread from giving voice to their concerns,
then definitionally, that is indeed stifling.

We're not terrorised by our government, pissed off at them, but we can always vote them out. You seem a lot more wary of your government, and say quite a few paranoid things.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Quote:

This grubby film is just intended to insult, and is full of lies.

and yet it has been taken so very very seriously. Muslims are idiots.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

OK. Let us conceive of a possible 2,OOO,OOO Englishmen
who wanted to be vocal in condemning specific Moslem atrocities,
but that thay remained silent in foreboding anxiety, wringing their hands
qua what misfortunes woud be inflicted upon them by your government,
avenging the Moslems.

You're deliberately misinterpreting what I'm saying. First of all this isn't about Moslems but hate speech. Moslems have been prosecuted for urging people to kill homosexulas.

Secondly there is nothing wrong in condemning atrocities, though why you focused on Moslem atrocities as opposed to others is telling. This is not about stifling the truth, which is what your media organisations did in the run up to the Iraq war, but stopping groups of people from being threatened.

So no problem with condemning atrocities, Moslem or other, but if you then start calling for Moslems to be rounded up and killed, or if you deliberately insult them by telling lies, you can be prosecuted for hate speech.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

So true! We still have Americans who believe Muslims are terrorists. Goes to show how people can be brainwashed easily, and it doesn't matter which country they live in.

They easily forget our home-grown terrorists like Tim McVeigh which represents a small minority, but still fail to tag all Americans as terrorists.

They lack not only common sense, but fail to understand the ratio of Muslim terrorists vs their total population in this world.

1 Reply

@engineer,

I did follow your two links. Neither of which would constitute hate speech under our legislation. Both are legitimate viewpoints though some would deem them controversial. The fact that these are being giving as serious reasons to oppose anti hate speech legislation says more about American paranoia than reality, and is a classic example of treating lies wither greater respect than the truth.

1 Reply

Does freedom of speech excuse preaching hate?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know