Slap MessageBoards
General Discussion => WHATEVER => Topic started by: NickDagger on June 13, 2008, 06:47:41 AM
-
This is one area where I think America actually gets it right and better than the supposedly more enlightened countries around the world, who seem to not have such a strong respect for free speech-instead seeming to value the protection of groups so that they are not criticized or offended:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/12/us/12hate.html
Canada, England, France, Germany, the Netherlands, South Africa, Australia and India all have laws or have signed international conventions banning hate speech. Israel and France forbid the sale of Nazi items like swastikas and flags. It is a crime to deny the Holocaust in Canada, Germany and France.
Earlier this month, the actress Brigitte Bardot, an animal rights activist, was fined $23,000 in France for provoking racial hatred by criticizing a Muslim ceremony involving the slaughter of sheep.
By contrast, American courts would not stop a planned march by the American Nazi Party in Skokie, Ill., in 1977, though a march would have been deeply distressing to the many Holocaust survivors there.
Six years later, a state court judge in New York dismissed a libel case brought by several Puerto Rican groups against a business executive who had called food stamps “basically a Puerto Rican program.” The First Amendment, Justice Eve M. Preminger wrote, does not allow even false statements about racial or ethnic groups to be suppressed or punished just because they may increase “the general level of prejudice.”
Some prominent legal scholars say the United States should reconsider its position on hate speech.
“It is not clear to me that the Europeans are mistaken,” Jeremy Waldron, a legal philosopher, wrote in The New York Review of Books last month, “when they say that a liberal democracy must take affirmative responsibility for protecting the atmosphere of mutual respect against certain forms of vicious attack.”
I wonder in light of the Muhammad cartoon controversy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy
And the murder of Theo Van Gogh:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theo_van_Gogh_(film_director)
How do you people feel about free speech, should "hate speech" be made illegal? Some European countries actually have "blasphemy laws," which is insane to me.
I'd like to here from the Europeans and Canadians on the board as well. I remember watching Manufacturing Consent, being dumbfounded at this scene-even Chomsky almost seems flabbergasted at the lack of understanding of the idea of free-speech that he experiences:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zz6Vbl-TWgI
Do people have the right to not be offended? Do people have the right to say or write what we find deplorable?
-
Well.
-
I'm canadian and from what I understand most of the rights have some limits. I have no problem with not having hate speech but it sort of seems like we shouldn't allow free speech to be limited at all. Like I said, I don't know that much i just know the limits from a law class. Since Muslims are an identifiable group inciting hatred against them would be illegal.
-
I've always thought banning hate speech was stupid. Its not like these people will change their minds. If you banned it, who knows what sort of pricks I might be hanging out with.
-
some Canadian pal needs to start denying the holocaust. Comercial D, where you at? if anyone believe the holocaust was fake, i know you have too.
-
what the fuck is the holocaust?
-
it's when the canadian's tried to commit genicide on the jews and then they bombed pearl harbor and brought us in to WWII
-
i feel like banning hate speech would make those who use it regualrly even angrier and maybe carry out their hatred with actions instead of just words. i would take a racist rant over a hateful beatdown any day.
-
I have no problem with not having hate speech but it sort of seems like we shouldn't allow free speech to be limited at all.
What is hate speech?
-
people need thicker skin, why the fuck would you care what someone else says
persecution should be illegal but people should be free to hate who ever they want
-
I can appreciate some good hate speech, now and then.
-
But on a serious note, 82% of Americans hate gooks.
I can imagine similar statistics in other regions, what would a ban do?
-
Expand Quote
I have no problem with not having hate speech but it sort of seems like we shouldn't allow free speech to be limited at all.
What is hate speech?
Anything that people would say to try to get people to dislike a group of people. Like if a dude went on a stage and said "Fuck all muslims." I don't thik it applies to conversations or anything. Maybe it would but who's going to police that? It's like 1984 material only against dicks and retards. Basically i just wouldn't want authorities to have any more authority than they have to.
-
I didn't the USA make laws saying that take away your rights if they feel they need to? I know in Canada you can have most if not all your rights removed for up to 5 years at a time with no real backing or reason. Its not something that they use often if ever but it is a tool they can use and most likely will. Also if a country declares a state of emergency your rights are gone as well.
-
while hate speech (promoting hatred against an identifiable group) is illegal in canada it is hard to charge someone as it is allowed in private conversation, or because of religious faith, or if the intent was to cause a public discussion about an important issue. i think there are other ways out too. charging someone with hate speech is not easy. i think freedom of speech is important but in terms of public broadcasting it is important to draw the line at hate speech.
-
while hate speech (promoting hatred against an identifiable group) is illegal in canada it is hard to charge someone as it is allowed in private conversation, or because of religious faith, or if the intent was to cause a public discussion about an important issue. i think there are other ways out too. charging someone with hate speech is not easy. i think freedom of speech is important but in terms of public broadcasting it is important to draw the line at hate speech.
hate speech has not place in broadcasting if you think of how censored the media really is theres no way they would even if there were not laws about it.
-
i dunno, some talk shows are pretty borderline on hate speech.
-
if there were no laws against it and it was not frowned upon would it be in ads? such as "jew free toothpaste"
-
"I might not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it" - Voltaire
On the other hand, there's lots of research into linguistic relativity, basically saying that the perspective of a society has an effect on its language, and that the language of a society has an effect on its perspective.
But, making certain words illegal is definitely stupid.
-
while hate speech (promoting hatred against an identifiable group) is illegal in canada it is hard to charge someone as it is allowed in private conversation, or because of religious faith, or if the intent was to cause a public discussion about an important issue. i think there are other ways out too. charging someone with hate speech is not easy. i think freedom of speech is important but in terms of public broadcasting it is important to draw the line at hate speech.
Then explain this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/12/us/12hate.html
A couple of years ago, a Canadian magazine published an article arguing that the rise of Islam threatened Western values. The article’s tone was mocking and biting, but it said nothing that conservative magazines and blogs in the United States do not say every day without fear of legal reprisal.
Things are different here. The magazine is on trial.
Two members of the Canadian Islamic Congress say the magazine, Maclean’s, Canada’s leading newsweekly, violated a provincial hate speech law by stirring up hatred against Muslims. They say the magazine should be forbidden from saying similar things, forced to publish a rebuttal and made to compensate Muslims for injuring their “dignity, feelings and self-respect.”
Canada, England, France, Germany, the Netherlands, South Africa, Australia and India all have laws or have signed international conventions banning hate speech. Israel and France forbid the sale of Nazi items like swastikas and flags. It is a crime to deny the Holocaust in Canada, Germany and France.
Earlier this month, the actress Brigitte Bardot, an animal rights activist, was fined $23,000 in France for provoking racial hatred by criticizing a Muslim ceremony involving the slaughter of sheep.
In comparison:
By contrast, American courts would not stop a planned march by the American Nazi Party in Skokie, Ill., in 1977, though a march would have been deeply distressing to the many Holocaust survivors there.
Six years later, a state court judge in New York dismissed a libel case brought by several Puerto Rican groups against a business executive who had called food stamps “basically a Puerto Rican program.” The First Amendment, Justice Eve M. Preminger wrote, does not allow even false statements about racial or ethnic groups to be suppressed or punished just because they may increase “the general level of prejudice.”
I love Chomsky's argument, here, saying that there are really only two views you can take on free speech, and the irony of using fascist techniques to preserve the feelings of say the relatives of holocaust victims:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zz6Vbl-TWgI
-
To me there is a huge difference between hate speech and free speech. I am not for banning either, though I think if somone is killed because of something you or the group you represent said then you should be held accountable for encoraging it. Also isn't it funny how it is almost always white people who are the ones rushing to defend hate speech, I wonder why bunch of hateful crackers!
And the person who was talking about talk shows and hatespeech, Fox news and Rush Limbaugh are both disgusting and hateful. I would say boarderline racist in the case of Fox and a racist in the case of Oxy Limbaugh.
Also isn't it funny how in our country we care more about some backwards assholes right to hate speech then we care about the health and well being of our fellow country person. I will trade the right to hate speech for universal health care anyday.
*highlighted for Fig Newton*
-
The idea that any of you have even thought about banning speech is a real testament to how stupid you all are. You'd trust Big Brother to do anything under the blanket of "saving whales," and "helping the poor/oppressed."
-
The idea that any of you have even thought about banning speech is a real testament to how stupid you all are. You'd trust Big Brother to do anything under the blanket of "saving whales," and "helping the poor/oppressed."
Could you point out where I said this in my response? And please just use my qoute do not assume or read into what I said. Thanks :-*
-
I have no problem with the way canada runs there free speech laws. to me it prevents mass racism and the eventual hate crimes. but thats just my opinion
-
The right to free speech in the United States is restricted by court cases, specifically if words will cause imminent lawless action. The phrase often attributed to this is "You can't shout fire in a crowded theatre," and though it's not the most perfect example to use, it suffices.
But I know that we ain't talking about legal rights, but rather moral rights and the personal value one holds of free speech.
Limiting speech is an unfortunate and difficult reality. One cannot slander, libel, or essentially cause damage to someone through false remarks. I think most people can see how this acts as a benefit to society. But then how do you handle someone saying, "Fuck it, don't limit speech!" because that notion allows people to run rampant with lies. I suppose one could say that a free society will course correct itself, but I don't find this to be true.
So, with this in mind, I think it's clear that there must exist some limit on free speech. And these limits should include hate speech. People are entitled to opinions, racist ones as well as accepting ones, but when these opinions become words, and specifically words which endanger someone's security, then they must be stopped. Having a neo-nazi conference, or a nazi protest where participants are yelling slurs wouldn't directly endanger a counterprotestor's security because it's safe to assume that there would be police in the area. But if it was at a bar and some dude was calling a Jew a kyke etc, and enticing people to attack him based on his Jewishness, then that should be limited.
But that's my opinion.
-
I didn't the USA make laws saying that take away your rights if they feel they need to? I know in Canada you can have most if not all your rights removed for up to 5 years at a time with no real backing or reason. Its not something that they use often if ever but it is a tool they can use and most likely will. Also if a country declares a state of emergency your rights are gone as well.
If I understand you correctly, you're talking about the anti-terrorism act, not something that would be applied on a day-to-day basis. That is almost a different discussion entirely.
I'm all for free speech as long as it doesn't interfere with the freedom of other individuals. If banning hate speech is going to stop racists congregations from forming, and possibly save lives, then I'm for the ban. It is possible that there are many factors, where the banning or allowing of "hate speech" could increase or decrease the likelihood of worse things occurring.
-
Expand Quote
I didn't the USA make laws saying that take away your rights if they feel they need to? I know in Canada you can have most if not all your rights removed for up to 5 years at a time with no real backing or reason. Its not something that they use often if ever but it is a tool they can use and most likely will. Also if a country declares a state of emergency your rights are gone as well.
If I understand you correctly, you're talking about the anti-terrorism act, not something that would be applied on a day-to-day basis. That is almost a different discussion entirely.
I'm all for free speech as long as it doesn't interfere with the freedom of other individuals. If banning hate speech is going to stop racists congregations from forming, and possibly save lives, then I'm for the ban. It is possible that there are many factors, where the banning or allowing of "hate speech" could increase or decrease the likelihood of worse things occurring.
Stopping congregations doesn't automatically save lives. If all it does is stop a congregation, then that's too much of an interference.
-
Free speech all the way. I think public-airwaves radio and TV are too censored. Talking shit is awesome.
Harassment, inciting a riot, libel/slander and similar are are already on the law books, but hate speech in an of itself shouldn't be illegal... if the "hate speech" gets to the point where it resembles one of the things already on the books, roll with it.
More often than not, hate speech is just ignorant-ass speech, and though it would be tempting to make stupidity illegal, it would make life very boring, and probably pretentious.
-
Expand Quote
I didn't the USA make laws saying that take away your rights if they feel they need to? I know in Canada you can have most if not all your rights removed for up to 5 years at a time with no real backing or reason. Its not something that they use often if ever but it is a tool they can use and most likely will. Also if a country declares a state of emergency your rights are gone as well.
If I understand you correctly, you're talking about the anti-terrorism act, not something that would be applied on a day-to-day basis. That is almost a different discussion entirely.
I'm all for free speech as long as it doesn't interfere with the freedom of other individuals. If banning hate speech is going to stop racists congregations from forming, and possibly save lives, then I'm for the ban. It is possible that there are many factors, where the banning or allowing of "hate speech" could increase or decrease the likelihood of worse things occurring.
ITs not something that could be applied day to day but there is still the rule that if they make a new law it can over ride your rights for up to 5 years
-
Free speech all the way. I think public-airwaves radio and TV are too censored. Talking shit is awesome.
Harassment, inciting a riot, libel/slander and similar are are already on the law books, but hate speech in an of itself shouldn't be illegal... if the "hate speech" gets to the point where it resembles one of the things already on the books, roll with it.
More often than not, hate speech is just ignorant-ass speech, and though it would be tempting to make stupidity illegal, it would make life very boring, and probably pretentious.
So where do we draw the line? Someone like Oxy Limbaugh making false racist statements against Michele Obama is libel in my opinion.
-
Expand Quote
Free speech all the way. I think public-airwaves radio and TV are too censored. Talking shit is awesome.
Harassment, inciting a riot, libel/slander and similar are are already on the law books, but hate speech in an of itself shouldn't be illegal... if the "hate speech" gets to the point where it resembles one of the things already on the books, roll with it.
More often than not, hate speech is just ignorant-ass speech, and though it would be tempting to make stupidity illegal, it would make life very boring, and probably pretentious.
So where do we draw the line? Someone like Oxy Limbaugh making false racist statements against Michele Obama is libel in my opinion.
I think the line's pretty much already been drawn, save for some situations that have a real grey area. I think Rush's worldview is both unrealistic and repugnant, but if he did commit an act of libel against Mrs. Obama, it's up to her to pursue that. Rush would just become a victim/martyr via the "activist judges" to his audience. There's a reason his fans are called "ditto heads," it's because they have no thought-forming processes of their own.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Free speech all the way. I think public-airwaves radio and TV are too censored. Talking shit is awesome.
Harassment, inciting a riot, libel/slander and similar are are already on the law books, but hate speech in an of itself shouldn't be illegal... if the "hate speech" gets to the point where it resembles one of the things already on the books, roll with it.
More often than not, hate speech is just ignorant-ass speech, and though it would be tempting to make stupidity illegal, it would make life very boring, and probably pretentious.
So where do we draw the line? Someone like Oxy Limbaugh making false racist statements against Michele Obama is libel in my opinion.
So say something bad was to happen to someone because of Limbaugh, what do you feel should happen then.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Free speech all the way. I think public-airwaves radio and TV are too censored. Talking shit is awesome.
Harassment, inciting a riot, libel/slander and similar are are already on the law books, but hate speech in an of itself shouldn't be illegal... if the "hate speech" gets to the point where it resembles one of the things already on the books, roll with it.
More often than not, hate speech is just ignorant-ass speech, and though it would be tempting to make stupidity illegal, it would make life very boring, and probably pretentious.
So where do we draw the line? Someone like Oxy Limbaugh making false racist statements against Michele Obama is libel in my opinion.
So say something bad was to happen to someone because of Limbaugh, what do you feel should happen then.
Nothing, just like I don't blame Marilyn Manson for teen suicides.
Anyone that does something because a radio personality says to do it is in the same class as the Son of Sam, who did whatever his neighbor's dog told him to do. There are laws against violent acts already, and unless Rush actually incites a riot, he has the right to lie and be the shitbag that he is.
-
Apparently 7 out of 10 of you are semi-fascists.
Discuss.
-
Apparently 7 out of 10 of you are semi-fascists.
Discuss.
You should look up the definition before you start name calling like that.
-
Expand Quote
Apparently 7 out of 10 of you are semi-fascists.
Discuss.
You should look up the definition before you start name calling like that.
Call it what you will, sacrificing freedom of speech of the individual for the supposed good of others is a slippery and ugly slope, also historically it is one of the first signs of a country's decline toward fascism.
If you don't believe in the right of others to express views you deplore, then you don't believe in free speech.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Apparently 7 out of 10 of you are semi-fascists.
Discuss.
You should look up the definition before you start name calling like that.
Call it what you will, sacrificing freedom of speech of the individual for the supposed good of others is a slippery and ugly slope, also historically it is one of the first signs of a country's decline toward fascism.
If you don't believe in the right of others to express views you deplore, then you don't believe in free speech.
I will ask the same question I asked Fig Newton, show me where I said I want to take away a person's right of speech? Please don't read into or make assumptions.
-
I'm talking about the dirty Canadian and Europeans, and others that have made statements like "if doing away with hate speech would ____ then i'm all for it!"
-
not a cool post
-
So, with this in mind, I think it's clear that there must exist some limit on free speech. And these limits should include hate speech. People are entitled to opinions, racist ones as well as accepting ones, but when these opinions become words, and specifically words which endanger someone's security, then they must be stopped. Having a neo-nazi conference, or a nazi protest where participants are yelling slurs wouldn't directly endanger a counterprotestor's security because it's safe to assume that there would be police in the area. But if it was at a bar and some dude was calling a Jew a kyke etc, and enticing people to attack him based on his Jewishness, then that should be limited
What you describe could be charged as harassment or even reckless endangerment.
Assholes just as easily try and goad people into fighting calling them fat or talking shit about their clothes, baseball team (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3382644), hair, girls or anything else.
Do we then add sports hating laws?
"Hate Speech" is just a non sequitur.
And any more laws sure as fuck aren't gonna make people stop being racist or doing what they're doing-just like with prohibition or anything else if you make something illegal it will just push it underground and create more black market and illegal activity, that is to say making everyone less safe.
Ever notice all the swastika graffiti randomly in European footage? Check out Torey Pudwell in the DVS video for instance, I noticed this after someone had told me that when they were in Europe one summer they noticed them EVERYWHERE. But hey, they have all those laws!?
Keep the assholes out in the open.
And again, it really is as simple as believing in free speech or not.
Grim's comparison to the supposed violence related to marilyon manson or rap music is accurate here.
In America we are to treat people and their actions for what they are, individual choices. This is the way it must be if we have any desire to be free. Anything else is childish quasi-fascism.
-
Expand Quote
So, with this in mind, I think it's clear that there must exist some limit on free speech. And these limits should include hate speech. People are entitled to opinions, racist ones as well as accepting ones, but when these opinions become words, and specifically words which endanger someone's security, then they must be stopped. Having a neo-nazi conference, or a nazi protest where participants are yelling slurs wouldn't directly endanger a counterprotestor's security because it's safe to assume that there would be police in the area. But if it was at a bar and some dude was calling a Jew a kyke etc, and enticing people to attack him based on his Jewishness, then that should be limited
What you describe could be charged as harassment or even reckless endangerment.
Assholes just as easily try and goad people into fighting calling them fat or talking shit about their clothes, baseball team (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3382644), hair, girls or anything else.
Do we then add sports hating laws?
"Hate Speech" is just a non sequitur.
And any more laws sure as fuck aren't gonna make people stop being racist or doing what they're doing-just like with prohibition or anything else if you make something illegal it will just push it underground and create more black market and illegal activity, that is to say making everyone less safe.
Ever notice all the swastika graffiti randomly in European footage? Check out Torey Pudwell in the DVS video for instance, I noticed this after someone had told me that when they were in Europe one summer they noticed them EVERYWHERE. But hey, they have all those laws!?
Keep the assholes out in the open.
And again, it really is as simple as believing in free speech or not.
Grim's comparison to the supposed violence related to marilyon manson or rap music is accurate here.
In America we are to treat people and their actions for what they are, individual choices. This is the way it must be if we have any desire to be free. Anything else is childish quasi-fascism.
Those are good points, and the whole defining Hate Speech is tough, though I disagree that something shouldn't be implemented simply because it will 'go underground'. But then we'd be having a whole debate about the merits of laws in general.
I believe in free speech. I don't believe in going to a David Duke assembly and nudging people saying, "Hey, wanna go fuck up some niggers?" and I don't believe in people who do that receiving no punishment. I don't know a solution that satisfies both needs and beliefs but I don't believe it's as black and white as saying you either believe in free speech or not. Because under that ultimatium, then inciting a riot, slander, libel, etc, would be allowed and society would work out the 'assholes'.
I appreciate your comments though and would like to hear what you have to say.
-
I believe in free speech. I don't believe in going to a David Duke assembly and nudging people saying, "Hey, wanna go fuck up some niggers?" and I don't believe in people who do that receiving no punishment. I don't know a solution that satisfies both needs and beliefs but I don't believe it's as black and white as saying you either believe in free speech or not. Because under that ultimatium, then inciting a riot, slander, libel, etc, would be allowed and society would work out the 'assholes'.
People should be free to say "HEY LETS KILL _____" but if any crime is actually committed, then there should be some conspiracy charge or something like that, the idea of incitement-style laws are kinda sketchy to me but I suppose if it was implemented decently that may be acceptable.
-
I have no problem with the way canada runs there free speech laws. to me it prevents mass racism and the eventual hate crimes. but thats just my opinion
Jesus fucking Christ. It's like you don't get that the government takes away a little bit of power, and then it takes away a little more, and then a little more. Soon, free speech is dead. But what the fuck do I, or science, know?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot-in-the-door_technique
Society deserves every fucking thing it gets, because it is filled with regular pieces of shit like you. I bet you think that was an intelligent, almost witty comment, and that you are the "enlightened" one for "looking abroad" at the shit stain we call a hat.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Apparently 7 out of 10 of you are semi-fascists.
Discuss.
You should look up the definition before you start name calling like that.
Call it what you will, sacrificing freedom of speech of the individual for the supposed good of others is a slippery and ugly slope, also historically it is one of the first signs of a country's decline toward fascism.
If you don't believe in the right of others to express views you deplore, then you don't believe in free speech.
I will ask the same question I asked Fig Newton, show me where I said I want to take away a person's right of speech? Please don't read into or make assumptions.
You automatically think I am fucking talking to you; like the shit you have to say is worthy of my response. It is not. I was talking to that other faggot.
-
people have rights until their rights infringe on the rights of others......... "infringing" is open to interpretation. honestly i don't care.
-
veganshawn, did you seriously delete my post in the free speech topic? you're a joke.
as far as i know there isn't really any federal law directly prohibiting hate speech in america - for example a kkk leader can go and give a speech about how niggers are taking their jobs, etc...and as long as he doesn't knowingly try to produce imminent lawless action...his speech is protected.
the law for advocacy of illegal action (incitement) = speech can only be prohibited if it is 'directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action AND is likely to incite or produce such action.'
the law on libel depends on who the person is talking about - if it's a public figure and the speech is on a matter of public concern the speech is much more protected than if the person is talking about a private citizen on a matter of private concern. i don't know what limbaugh said about michelle obama, but it could probably be construed as on a matter of public concern and she is a public figure. So, to get limbaugh for libel michelle obama (she would have to be the plaintiff) would have to prove that the statement was both 'defamatory and false, and made with reckless disregard for the truth or knowledge of its untruth.' there is no chance that m obama in the middle of the campaign is going to sue rush limbaugh, and even if she did, she'd probably lose.
-
veganshawn, did you seriously delete my post in the free speech topic? you're a joke.
I cleaned up the topic that is all, there was some stuff that had nothing to do with the topic. Nice try at being a martyr, boo hoo you fucking worthless baby. :-*
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Apparently 7 out of 10 of you are semi-fascists.
Discuss.
You should look up the definition before you start name calling like that.
Call it what you will, sacrificing freedom of speech of the individual for the supposed good of others is a slippery and ugly slope, also historically it is one of the first signs of a country's decline toward fascism.
If you don't believe in the right of others to express views you deplore, then you don't believe in free speech.
I will ask the same question I asked Fig Newton, show me where I said I want to take away a person's right of speech? Please don't read into or make assumptions.
Of course when I am proved wrong I resort to name calling because I am not man enough to own up.
-
veganshawn you are a fucking worthless baby.
-
veganshawn you are a fucking worthless baby.
;D This made me laugh, if you are going to put me down come up with your own material, jeez.
-
Expand Quote
veganshawn, did you seriously delete my post in the free speech topic? you're a joke.
I cleaned up the topic that is all, there was some stuff that had nothing to do with the topic. Nice try at being a martyr, boo hoo you fucking worthless baby. :-*
wow...the irony is something else on this one.
-
dude you are seriously the biggest pussy i have ever seen on this forum. you cry like something i've never seen, and you're a grown fucking man.
-
dude you are seriously the biggest pussy i have ever seen on this forum. you cry like something i've never seen, and you're a grown fucking man.
Does it make you feel like a big man to call people names and kook them when you get the chance, must make you feel so tough. Now you are ruining this topic and why, so you can stick up for something and look cool. I cleaned up the topic because I didn't want the thread ruined and now you are going and ruining it. Way to go young ass kid.
-
you have the most stained logic on this forum, everything you say is full of complete shit. youre ruining this forum in it's entirety. "looking cool" get your head out of your ass and stop rerouting the only thing that matters right now. the fact that your existence on this forum is saddening to anyone with a fucking brain. at the very least your moderation abilities should be stripped. avoiding your ignorance by calling me a young ass kid and saying i'm looking cool forever proves your inability to be senile. get the fuck out of here you piece of trash. stop positioning this shit with "big man" and all this ridiculous nonsense because you do it every fucking time any one calls you out and continually fail to see your pathetic and ridiculous abilities. man the fuck up.
-
you have the most stained logic on this forum, everything you say is full of complete shit. youre ruining this forum in it's entirety. "looking cool" get your head out of your ass and stop rerouting the only thing that matters right now. the fact that your existence on this forum is saddening to anyone with a fucking brain. at the very least your moderation abilities should be stripped. avoiding your ignorance by calling me a young ass kid and saying i'm looking cool forever proves your inability to be senile. get the fuck out of here you piece of trash. stop positioning this shit with "big man" and all this ridiculous nonsense because you do it every fucking time any one calls you out and continually fail to see your pathetic and ridiculous abilities. man the fuck up.
Ha ha ha honestly you wasted 5 mins writing this. ha ha ha ha ha ha thanks for the laughs keep them coming.
-
absolutely pathetic.
-
I am absolutely pathetic.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Apparently 7 out of 10 of you are semi-fascists.
Discuss.
You should look up the definition before you start name calling like that.
Call it what you will, sacrificing freedom of speech of the individual for the supposed good of others is a slippery and ugly slope, also historically it is one of the first signs of a country's decline toward fascism.
If you don't believe in the right of others to express views you deplore, then you don't believe in free speech.
I will ask the same question I asked Fig Newton, show me where I said I want to take away a person's right of speech? Please don't read into or make assumptions.
Of course when I am proved wrong I resort to name calling because I am not man enough to own up.
WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? I WAS NOT TALKING TO YOU. Jesus Christ.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Apparently 7 out of 10 of you are semi-fascists.
Discuss.
You should look up the definition before you start name calling like that.
Call it what you will, sacrificing freedom of speech of the individual for the supposed good of others is a slippery and ugly slope, also historically it is one of the first signs of a country's decline toward fascism.
If you don't believe in the right of others to express views you deplore, then you don't believe in free speech.
I will ask the same question I asked Fig Newton, show me where I said I want to take away a person's right of speech? Please don't read into or make assumptions.
Of course when I am proved wrong I resort to name calling because I am not man enough to own up.
WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? I WAS NOT TALKING TO YOU. Jesus Christ.
Then what was the "saving the whales" comment about? :-*
-
Expand Quote
I am absolutely pathetic.
wow...for the sake of the laughter or pure second hand embarrassment, please tell us how old you are.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Apparently 7 out of 10 of you are semi-fascists.
Discuss.
You should look up the definition before you start name calling like that.
Call it what you will, sacrificing freedom of speech of the individual for the supposed good of others is a slippery and ugly slope, also historically it is one of the first signs of a country's decline toward fascism.
If you don't believe in the right of others to express views you deplore, then you don't believe in free speech.
I will ask the same question I asked Fig Newton, show me where I said I want to take away a person's right of speech? Please don't read into or make assumptions.
Of course when I am proved wrong I resort to name calling because I am not man enough to own up.
WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? I WAS NOT TALKING TO YOU. Jesus Christ.
Then what was the "saving the whales" comment about? :-*
The left-wing attitude of this forum -- you are not the only environmentalist here.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
I am absolutely pathetic.
wow...for the sake of the laughter or pure second hand embarrassment, please tell us how old you are.
It is clearly displayed on my account. Why should I be embarrassed?
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Apparently 7 out of 10 of you are semi-fascists.
Discuss.
You should look up the definition before you start name calling like that.
Call it what you will, sacrificing freedom of speech of the individual for the supposed good of others is a slippery and ugly slope, also historically it is one of the first signs of a country's decline toward fascism.
If you don't believe in the right of others to express views you deplore, then you don't believe in free speech.
I will ask the same question I asked Fig Newton, show me where I said I want to take away a person's right of speech? Please don't read into or make assumptions.
Of course when I am proved wrong I resort to name calling because I am not man enough to own up.
WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? I WAS NOT TALKING TO YOU. Jesus Christ.
Then what was the "saving the whales" comment about? :-*
The left-wing attitude of this forum -- you are not the only environmentalist here.
:-*
-
holy motherfucking shit.
did a 36 year old self professed anarchist moderator on a skate board message board just delete some posts and change some people's quotes in a thread about free speech?
-
holy motherfucking shit.
did a 36 year old self professed anarchist moderator on a skate board message board just delete some posts and change some people's quotes in a thread about free speech?
Yes. And what's even more ironic is the fact that while doing all of that, he is challenging me to "find where [he] said he wanted speech banned."
-
holy motherfucking shit.
did a 36 year old self professed anarchist moderator on a skate board message board just delete some posts and change some people's quotes in a thread about free speech?
Why don't you admit who you are, I will delete my account if you admit who you really are with proof to back it up.
-
Expand Quote
holy motherfucking shit.
did a 36 year old self professed anarchist moderator on a skate board message board just delete some posts and change some people's quotes in a thread about free speech?
Yes. And what's even more ironic is the fact that while doing all of that, he is challenging me to "find where [he] said he wanted speech banned."
I am still waiting for you to show me proof.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
holy motherfucking shit.
did a 36 year old self professed anarchist moderator on a skate board message board just delete some posts and change some people's quotes in a thread about free speech?
Yes. And what's even more ironic is the fact that while doing all of that, he is challenging me to "find where [he] said he wanted speech banned."
I am still waiting for you to show me proof.
you're actively fucking banning it on here on an almost daily basis you fucking dummy.
and what the fuck has it got to do with anything who i am, who the fuck are you?
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
holy motherfucking shit.
did a 36 year old self professed anarchist moderator on a skate board message board just delete some posts and change some people's quotes in a thread about free speech?
Yes. And what's even more ironic is the fact that while doing all of that, he is challenging me to "find where [he] said he wanted speech banned."
I am still waiting for you to show me proof.
Proof of what? I never made any claim against you. I was not talking to you to begin with.
Your actions on this forum do suggest that you would like speech to be limited. I do not know how you feel about speech being limited in terms of actual law imposed by the government, but deleting any post made on this forum is a way of limiting speech.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
holy motherfucking shit.
did a 36 year old self professed anarchist moderator on a skate board message board just delete some posts and change some people's quotes in a thread about free speech?
Yes. And what's even more ironic is the fact that while doing all of that, he is challenging me to "find where [he] said he wanted speech banned."
I am still waiting for you to show me proof.
you're actively fucking banning it on here on an almost daily basis you fucking dummy.
and what the fuck has it got to do with anything who i am, who the fuck are you?
My name is Shawn, I live in Portland, I am 36 years old , I have been skating 23 years, I am married and have kids, I have two dogs, two cats, and a hamster.... what more do you want to know?
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
holy motherfucking shit.
did a 36 year old self professed anarchist moderator on a skate board message board just delete some posts and change some people's quotes in a thread about free speech?
Yes. And what's even more ironic is the fact that while doing all of that, he is challenging me to "find where [he] said he wanted speech banned."
I am still waiting for you to show me proof.
Proof of what? I never made any claim against you. I was not talking to you to begin with.
Your actions on this forum do suggest that you would like speech to be limited. I do not know how you feel about speech being limited in terms of actual law imposed by the government, but deleting any post made on this forum is a way of limiting speech.
I only want to limit your speech :-*
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
holy motherfucking shit.
did a 36 year old self professed anarchist moderator on a skate board message board just delete some posts and change some people's quotes in a thread about free speech?
Yes. And what's even more ironic is the fact that while doing all of that, he is challenging me to "find where [he] said he wanted speech banned."
I am still waiting for you to show me proof.
you're actively fucking banning it on here on an almost daily basis you fucking dummy.
and what the fuck has it got to do with anything who i am, who the fuck are you?
My name is Shawn, I live in Portland, I am 36 years old , I have been skating 23 years, I am married and have kids, I have two dogs, two cats, and a hamster.... what more do you want to know?
I would love to eat one of your cats.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
holy motherfucking shit.
did a 36 year old self professed anarchist moderator on a skate board message board just delete some posts and change some people's quotes in a thread about free speech?
Yes. And what's even more ironic is the fact that while doing all of that, he is challenging me to "find where [he] said he wanted speech banned."
I am still waiting for you to show me proof.
you're actively fucking banning it on here on an almost daily basis you fucking dummy.
and what the fuck has it got to do with anything who i am, who the fuck are you?
My name is Shawn, I live in Portland, I am 36 years old , I have been skating 23 years, I am married and have kids, I have two dogs, two cats, and a hamster.... what more do you want to know?
how old's your daughter?
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
holy motherfucking shit.
did a 36 year old self professed anarchist moderator on a skate board message board just delete some posts and change some people's quotes in a thread about free speech?
Yes. And what's even more ironic is the fact that while doing all of that, he is challenging me to "find where [he] said he wanted speech banned."
I am still waiting for you to show me proof.
you're actively fucking banning it on here on an almost daily basis you fucking dummy.
and what the fuck has it got to do with anything who i am, who the fuck are you?
My name is Shawn, I live in Portland, I am 36 years old , I have been skating 23 years, I am married and have kids, I have two dogs, two cats, and a hamster.... what more do you want to know?
how old's your daughter?
that is none of your business. I see you are still hiding who you are coward.
-
Expand Quote
veganshawn, did you seriously delete my post in the free speech topic? you're a joke.
I cleaned up the topic that is all, there was some stuff that had nothing to do with the topic. Nice try at being a martyr, boo hoo you fucking worthless baby. :-*
wow. this has to be the single most hilarious bitch move in the history of the forum. you deleted my post, which was directly on topic, in a free speech thread. a free speech thread in which you had just said:
To me there is a huge difference between hate speech and free speech. I am not for banning either,
you are a fucking clown.
if anyone cares (and read this quick b/c it will probably get deleted) we were talking about whether people should be responsible for the consequences of their speech. veganshawn said something profound like 'if your speech contributes to someone's death, then you should be held accountable.' (he conveniently deleted this post as well as my response to it) then a few posts later he was making fun of some dude named 'Greg' or something (post also deleted), and so all i said in my post was: 'if Greg kills himself b/c of your post about him, then you think you should be held accountable right?' so my post was directly on topic (i.e., about whether people should be held accountable for the consequences of their exercise of free speech).
i seriously cannot imagine what kind of insecure, childish, crybaby would delete that post. please drown your kids in the bathtub and castrate yourself, stat.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
veganshawn, did you seriously delete my post in the free speech topic? you're a joke.
I cleaned up the topic that is all, there was some stuff that had nothing to do with the topic. Nice try at being a martyr, boo hoo you fucking worthless baby. :-*
wow. this has to be the single most hilarious bitch move in the history of the forum. you deleted my post, which was directly on topic, in a free speech thread. a free speech thread in which you had just said:
Expand Quote
To me there is a huge difference between hate speech and free speech. I am not for banning either,
if anyone cares (and read this quick b/c it will probably get deleted) we were talking about whether people should be responsible for the consequences of their speech. veganshawn said something profound like 'if your speech contributes to someone's death, then you should be held accountable.' (he conveniently deleted this post as well as my response to it) then a few posts later he was making fun of some dude named 'Greg' or something (post also deleted), and so all i said in my post was: 'if Greg kills himself b/c of your post about him, then you think you should be held accountable right?' so my post was directly on topic (i.e., about whether people should be held accountable for the consequences of their exercise of free speech).
i seriously cannot imagine what kind of insecure, childish, crybaby would delete that post. please drown your kids in the bathtub and castrate yourself, stat.
Why don't you come to Portland and talk this shit in person you fucking worthless kook.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
veganshawn, did you seriously delete my post in the free speech topic? you're a joke.
I cleaned up the topic that is all, there was some stuff that had nothing to do with the topic. Nice try at being a martyr, boo hoo you fucking worthless baby. :-*
wow. this has to be the single most hilarious bitch move in the history of the forum. you deleted my post, which was directly on topic, in a free speech thread. a free speech thread in which you had just said:
Expand Quote
To me there is a huge difference between hate speech and free speech. I am not for banning either,
if anyone cares (and read this quick b/c it will probably get deleted) we were talking about whether people should be responsible for the consequences of their speech. veganshawn said something profound like 'if your speech contributes to someone's death, then you should be held accountable.' (he conveniently deleted this post as well as my response to it) then a few posts later he was making fun of some dude named 'Greg' or something (post also deleted), and so all i said in my post was: 'if Greg kills himself b/c of your post about him, then you think you should be held accountable right?' so my post was directly on topic (i.e., about whether people should be held accountable for the consequences of their exercise of free speech).
i seriously cannot imagine what kind of insecure, childish, crybaby would delete that post. please drown your kids in the bathtub and castrate yourself, stat.
Why don't you come to Portland and talk this shit in person you fucking worthless kook.
If this is the kind of action and discourse you are having with posters, you should not be a moderator Veganshawn.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
veganshawn, did you seriously delete my post in the free speech topic? you're a joke.
I cleaned up the topic that is all, there was some stuff that had nothing to do with the topic. Nice try at being a martyr, boo hoo you fucking worthless baby. :-*
wow. this has to be the single most hilarious bitch move in the history of the forum. you deleted my post, which was directly on topic, in a free speech thread. a free speech thread in which you had just said:
Expand Quote
To me there is a huge difference between hate speech and free speech. I am not for banning either,
if anyone cares (and read this quick b/c it will probably get deleted) we were talking about whether people should be responsible for the consequences of their speech. veganshawn said something profound like 'if your speech contributes to someone's death, then you should be held accountable.' (he conveniently deleted this post as well as my response to it) then a few posts later he was making fun of some dude named 'Greg' or something (post also deleted), and so all i said in my post was: 'if Greg kills himself b/c of your post about him, then you think you should be held accountable right?' so my post was directly on topic (i.e., about whether people should be held accountable for the consequences of their exercise of free speech).
i seriously cannot imagine what kind of insecure, childish, crybaby would delete that post. please drown your kids in the bathtub and castrate yourself, stat.
Why don't you come to Portland and talk this shit in person you fucking worthless kook.
Just remember to not bring a wallet, to stay away from the parks, and also to keep in mind that black tar heroin is as good as cash in most retail stores.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
veganshawn, did you seriously delete my post in the free speech topic? you're a joke.
I cleaned up the topic that is all, there was some stuff that had nothing to do with the topic. Nice try at being a martyr, boo hoo you fucking worthless baby. :-*
wow. this has to be the single most hilarious bitch move in the history of the forum. you deleted my post, which was directly on topic, in a free speech thread. a free speech thread in which you had just said:
Expand Quote
To me there is a huge difference between hate speech and free speech. I am not for banning either,
if anyone cares (and read this quick b/c it will probably get deleted) we were talking about whether people should be responsible for the consequences of their speech. veganshawn said something profound like 'if your speech contributes to someone's death, then you should be held accountable.' (he conveniently deleted this post as well as my response to it) then a few posts later he was making fun of some dude named 'Greg' or something (post also deleted), and so all i said in my post was: 'if Greg kills himself b/c of your post about him, then you think you should be held accountable right?' so my post was directly on topic (i.e., about whether people should be held accountable for the consequences of their exercise of free speech).
i seriously cannot imagine what kind of insecure, childish, crybaby would delete that post. please drown your kids in the bathtub and castrate yourself, stat.
Why don't you come to Portland and talk this shit in person you fucking worthless kook.
Just remember to not bring a wallet, to stay away from the parks, and also to keep in mind that black tar heroin is as good as cash in most retail stores.
(http://a350.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/13/m_04dc1d955f3ce700f74177e640dfab2d.jpg)
-
yo shawn,
i've had various names on the boards for a pretty long time now (since the start of or before the days of beans/andru o/ your mother hates you/big mike/sluggo. i posted as steve for a while, something with x's in it, and another name that i can't remember) and i'm not saying that to try to give myself any cred as a slap message board poster, but i've always thought that your were a solid poster making decent points. I also think that you don't really care how you're viewed by others simply because that's how you seem to roll, but if it's not so and you're letting these fucks get to you, just chill. I dont give a fuck about any of these kids here, under 20 fuckers who don't yet have an idea.... but fuck dude, if you dig the SLAP board as much as you seem to, do it a favor and lay off these clowns.
How i'm seeing it is like this, if you reallly don't care about what these newb/fake account fuckers are saying, blow them off like the sheckler threads. but if you do care, which is the look you're putting out there right now, be forth right about it. these are just words dude,let them be steezy. people here know how to get your goat, just be easy. i wish you well man.
steve
-
yo shawn,
i've had various names on the boards for a pretty long time now (since the start of or before the days of beans/andru o/ your mother hates you/big mike/sluggo. i posted as steve for a while, something with x's in it, and another name that i can't remember) and i'm not saying that to try to give myself any cred as a slap message board poster, but i've always thought that your were a solid poster making decent points. I also think that you don't really care how you're viewed by others simply because that's how you seem to roll, but if it's not so and you're letting these fucks get to you, just chill. I dont give a fuck about any of these kids here, under 20 fuckers who don't yet have an idea.... but fuck dude, if you dig the SLAP board as much as you seem to, do it a favor and lay off these clowns.
How i'm seeing it is like this, if you reallly don't care about what these newb/fake account fuckers are saying, blow them off like the sheckler threads. but if you do care, which is the look you're putting out there right now, be forth right about it. these are just words dude,let them be steezy. people here know how to get your goat, just be easy. i wish you well man.
steve
That has got to be the gayest thing I have ever read.
-
these are just words dude,let them be steezy.
-
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
veganshawn, did you seriously delete my post in the free speech topic? you're a joke.
I cleaned up the topic that is all, there was some stuff that had nothing to do with the topic. Nice try at being a martyr, boo hoo you fucking worthless baby. :-*
wow. this has to be the single most hilarious bitch move in the history of the forum. you deleted my post, which was directly on topic, in a free speech thread. a free speech thread in which you had just said:
Expand Quote
To me there is a huge difference between hate speech and free speech. I am not for banning either,
if anyone cares (and read this quick b/c it will probably get deleted) we were talking about whether people should be responsible for the consequences of their speech. veganshawn said something profound like 'if your speech contributes to someone's death, then you should be held accountable.' (he conveniently deleted this post as well as my response to it) then a few posts later he was making fun of some dude named 'Greg' or something (post also deleted), and so all i said in my post was: 'if Greg kills himself b/c of your post about him, then you think you should be held accountable right?' so my post was directly on topic (i.e., about whether people should be held accountable for the consequences of their exercise of free speech).
i seriously cannot imagine what kind of insecure, childish, crybaby would delete that post. please drown your kids in the bathtub and castrate yourself, stat.
Why don't you come to Portland and talk this shit in person you fucking worthless kook.
Greg is not posting here anymore, you person. He has not posted here in months. He said this board is a waste of time, and that you are all regular and hopeless. He also said to show you this:
(http://photos-a.ak.facebook.com/photos-ak-sf2p/v256/41/73/699143398/n699143398_497912_2856.jpg)
-
Expand Quote
yo shawn,
i've had various names on the boards for a pretty long time now (since the start of or before the days of beans/andru o/ your mother hates you/big mike/sluggo. i posted as steve for a while, something with x's in it, and another name that i can't remember) and i'm not saying that to try to give myself any cred as a slap message board poster, but i've always thought that your were a solid poster making decent points. I also think that you don't really care how you're viewed by others simply because that's how you seem to roll, but if it's not so and you're letting these fucks get to you, just chill. I dont give a fuck about any of these kids here, under 20 fuckers who don't yet have an idea.... but fuck dude, if you dig the SLAP board as much as you seem to, do it a favor and lay off these clowns.
How i'm seeing it is like this, if you reallly don't care about what these newb/fake account fuckers are saying, blow them off like the sheckler threads. but if you do care, which is the look you're putting out there right now, be forth right about it. these are just words dude,let them be steezy. people here know how to get your goat, just be easy. i wish you well man.
steve
That has got to be the gayest thing I have ever read.
oh man, burn.....
-
I didn't read any of this I just can't wait for a free speech thread to get deleted.
-
Hay guise is this "hate speech?"
(http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/4435/danishcartoon07ut7.jpg)
-
No it is hate drawing :)
-
88% Say Free Speech is Good, But Only 53% Oppose Ban on Hate Speech (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/88_say_free_speech_is_good_but_only_53_oppose_ban_on_hate_speech)
-
I think in America there are other issues that are just as important.
1. Health Care
2. Global Warming
3. Rising gas prices
4. The destruction of the constitution
5. Homelessness
-
I think in America there are other issues that are just as important.
1. Health Care
That is a way bigger issue than free speech.
-
So who is in favor of banning KKK marches and stuff like that?
-
Should Al Queida (sp?) be allowed to march though downtown NYC, celebrating their version of terrorism? Protected by police with our tax money?
-
I think in America there are other issues that are just as important.
1. Health Care
2. Global Warming
3. Rising gas prices
4. The destruction of the constitution
5. Homelessness
Should Al Queida (sp?) be allowed to march though downtown NYC, celebrating their version of terrorism? Protected by police with our tax money?
4. is what this thread is about and considering that le ol' Constitution is the legal foundation of this country, I'd say that'd be tied for #1.
And yes, Al Qaeda members should be allowed to march.
-
yep....i agree too....at the same time they are pushing for gang legislation here where if you get caught doing a crime in the scope of being in a gang you get penalized even more.....some may say that's unconstitutional cause you have a right to hang out w. whoever... i disagree w. that....that's my line....
-
Should Al Queida (sp?) be allowed to march though downtown NYC, celebrating their version of terrorism? Protected by police with our tax money?
Sure, why not? Unless it's terrorists or others that have broken the law in that regard(who would obviously be arrested), then you can march for whatever you want. Don't like it? Stage a counter demonstration. Or just don't pay attention to it as we don't just about everything else that goes on.
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7462728.stm