Page 15 of 22 FirstFirst ... 5111213141516171819 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 375 of 529

Thread: Hate speech laws - It is good for Nazis to be terrified

  1. #351
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    *sigh* Ohio
    Posts
    7,560

    Default

    There have been studies that show that white Christian men feel they're the most persecuted group in America. Don't know how they got that line of thinking though.

  2. #352
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    9,293

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bobjr View Post
    There have been studies that show that white Christian men feel they're the most persecuted group in America. Don't know how they got that line of thinking though.
    When you are so accustomed to your privilege and inequality to the point where it's an inseparable part of your identity, any form equality or attention giving to anything else outside of that realm will be seen as a persecution of freedoms.
    Quote Originally Posted by chuboy View Post
    Quick, someone get the scientific community onto this one! A truly brilliant hypothesis that would have been insofar overlooked by every researcher who has contributed to this field of science. And it's only 8th grade stuff!
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Zero
    I roam Johto with my partner Pokemon, Rattata, who knows Hyper Fang, Sunny Day, Rock Smash and Cut. Anyone who runs with more than one Pokemon or evolves their Pokemon takes the game way too seriously.

  3. #353
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    616

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chess-z View Post
    My man, I got that from years of reading on race and how power structures play into race. I am by no means an expert, but your appeal to ignorance is starting ti be a pain. How would you define racism, 'expert', since my time was clearly wasted.
    Sorry I haven't been reading on race for years. I just did a google search and found that racism is "prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior."
    Quote Originally Posted by chess-z View Post
    EDIT: Ghostanime hit it on the head. You don't have a personal stake in this discussion cause you can't. These issues only matter to you on an exclusively ideological level. You aren't at risk in the same way a POC or a LGBT+ person is.
    Great way to win an argument. LGBT's can pass any law they want concerning the LGBT community, because anyone whose not LGBT doesn't have a personal stake and therefore their arguments are irrelevant.

    @Ghostanime: Fair enough, I respect you and condemn racism just as much as anyone.
    Last edited by snorlax512; 8th February 2017 at 11:21 PM.

  4. #354
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    where u arent
    Posts
    263

    Default

    I was telling you not to talk over LGBT+ people like me, but you're deadset on doing so, so I guess w/e. Although, I mean you got a point in that strawman you just made. Men shouldn't be able to make laws about women's reproductive rights cause they aren't woman.

    Pokemon Showdown: chess-z
    Friend Code: 3883-9258-9472
    tumblr

    if u ever take issue with anything that i say let me know
    polite disagreement leads to enlightenment
    i claimed zoroark

    Quote Originally Posted by GhostAnime View Post
    a 3DS debater. nice.

  5. #355

    Default

    Freedom Of The Press Was A Mistake



  6. #356
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    where u arent
    Posts
    263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sam40400 View Post
    Freedom Of The Press Was A Mistake
    Yikes. This isn't really the place for this deabte, and that's an uncomfortably authoritarian stance you got there.

    Also, ghostanime, if my definition of racism is wrong, please correct me.

    Pokemon Showdown: chess-z
    Friend Code: 3883-9258-9472
    tumblr

    if u ever take issue with anything that i say let me know
    polite disagreement leads to enlightenment
    i claimed zoroark

    Quote Originally Posted by GhostAnime View Post
    a 3DS debater. nice.

  7. #357
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    *sigh* Ohio
    Posts
    7,560

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chess-z View Post
    I was telling you not to talk over LGBT+ people like me, but you're deadset on doing so, so I guess w/e. Although, I mean you got a point in that strawman you just made. Men shouldn't be able to make laws about women's reproductive rights cause they aren't woman.
    That's a big part of the issue with this stuff. Look at any time politicians sign a law limiting women's rights. You never see a woman in the room. Same with black rights. Either women and minorities are actually that unqualified to reach these positions, or white men really do hold a majority of the power, and it's kinda obvious which one it is.

  8. #358
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    616

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chess-z View Post
    I was telling you not to talk over LGBT+ people like me, but you're deadset on doing so, so I guess w/e. Although, I mean you got a point in that strawman you just made. Men shouldn't be able to make laws about women's reproductive rights cause they aren't woman.
    Ha, ha. It's not like the women themselves voted for the man to make the law right? Also, do you really think that stuff like abortion doesn't concern men because it is in the woman's body? Is it not his child as well? Does he not have to pay child support?

  9. #359
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snorlax512 View Post
    Ha, ha. It's not like the women themselves voted for the man to make the law right? Also, do you really think that stuff like abortion doesn't concern men because it is in the woman's body? Is it not his child as well? Does he not have to pay child support?
    concerning men and being governed by only men are two completely different things. Also men should not trump a woman's decision for abortion in any way what so ever. They can go knock someone else up.

  10. #360
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    where u arent
    Posts
    263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snorlax512 View Post
    Ha, ha. It's not like the women themselves voted for the man to make the law right? Also, do you really think that stuff like abortion doesn't concern men because it is in the woman's body? Is it not his child as well? Does he not have to pay child support?
    Updating my statement: Men alone should not make laws about woman's reproductive rights. It's telling that no women draft those laws.

    Pokemon Showdown: chess-z
    Friend Code: 3883-9258-9472
    tumblr

    if u ever take issue with anything that i say let me know
    polite disagreement leads to enlightenment
    i claimed zoroark

    Quote Originally Posted by GhostAnime View Post
    a 3DS debater. nice.

  11. #361
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    9,293

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snorlax512 View Post
    @Ghostanime: Fair enough, I respect you and condemn racism just as much as anyone.
    But how much of the topic do you truly understand? Do you have the slightest clue how infectious and large racism stretches across? Based on our discussion the past week, it wouldn't be too much of an assumption to say that your understanding of racism is limited to the KKK and words.

    Quote Originally Posted by chess-z
    Racism is racial prejudice plus power.
    This is the definition I prescribe to and go by. I will admit though that among poc, some still prefer to just use systematic racism.

    Most of us would rather go by this for simplicity's sake in order to better acknowledge what is truly the only difference between whites and non-whites.

    Also, there's still some split discussion on poc being able to have power over other poc (like Asians over Hispanics, for example) but none of that means anything in this context at the moment.

    btw speak about race however you want. y'all know what you're doing.
    Quote Originally Posted by chuboy View Post
    Quick, someone get the scientific community onto this one! A truly brilliant hypothesis that would have been insofar overlooked by every researcher who has contributed to this field of science. And it's only 8th grade stuff!
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Zero
    I roam Johto with my partner Pokemon, Rattata, who knows Hyper Fang, Sunny Day, Rock Smash and Cut. Anyone who runs with more than one Pokemon or evolves their Pokemon takes the game way too seriously.

  12. #362
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,661

    Default

    I'm actually sort of happy this thread isn't too active anymore lol.

  13. #363
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    9,293

    Default

    Why's that??
    Quote Originally Posted by chuboy View Post
    Quick, someone get the scientific community onto this one! A truly brilliant hypothesis that would have been insofar overlooked by every researcher who has contributed to this field of science. And it's only 8th grade stuff!
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Zero
    I roam Johto with my partner Pokemon, Rattata, who knows Hyper Fang, Sunny Day, Rock Smash and Cut. Anyone who runs with more than one Pokemon or evolves their Pokemon takes the game way too seriously.

  14. #364
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,661

    Default

    hopefully something came out of it and some people might have changed their mind on certain things,
    but it could have just become inactive due to lack of interest to continue conversation too.

  15. #365
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    *sigh* Ohio
    Posts
    7,560

    Default

    Anyone giving the time of day to ideas that have already been super-debunked in any reasonable sense or obviously lead to bad effects. The co-founder of Richard Spencer's website wrote an article where they need to start 'asking the question' of whether black genocide was good or not. People will occasionally come to you with this question being their ultimate intent. There is NO correct answer to this question besides 'fuck off.' The existence of other humans is not up for debate and allowing that sort of debate to happen,by taking part in it and being 'the other side', is a grievous error.

    Fascism will continue to thrive until people have no time for it. And when one of them gets punched, sure, it's a crime, but being vocally happy it happened is good - make these people feel like their ideas aren't tolerated and maybe they'll quiet down and we can build better systems and have better discussions.

    But really, how many people who are against hate speech laws are against their privileges taken away?

  16. #366
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    616

    Default

    For those of you advocating for hate speech bans, what exactly constitutes hate speech in your opinion? When is the line drawn between insults and hate speech?

  17. #367
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Verdant Court, Arbor Area
    Posts
    730

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snorlax512 View Post
    For those of you advocating for hate speech bans, what exactly constitutes hate speech in your opinion? When is the line drawn between insults and hate speech?
    In Australia State Hate Speech laws are determined by the impact the speech has on it's audience - it has to have the potential to create feelings of extreme hatred towards a minority group among it's target audience. Check out section 124A of the Queensland Anti-discrimination Statute:

    (1) A person must not, by a public act, incite hatred towards, serious contempt for, or severe ridicule of, a person or group of persons on the ground of the race, religion, sexuality or gender identity of the person or members of the group.
    The speech act is therefore only covered by the provision if it incites one of the relevant emotions regarding a person or group of person becasue of their membership in one of the listed classes. GLBTI v Wilkes sets out the elements that are needed for a speech act to breach the act

    I accept that in considering whether the section has been contravened:
    (a) The respondents' intent to incite is irrelevant: Burns v Dye [2002] NSWADT 32, para 21; John Fairfax Publications Ltd v Kazak [2002] NSWADTAP 35 at para 10; Veloskey & Anor v Karagiannakis & Ors [2002] NSWADTAP 18, para 24, Burns v Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd & Ors [2004] NSWADT 267, para 12.
    (b) What is required is that there has been incitement to another to hate etc rather than a mere conveyance of a hatred already held by the speaker cf Burns v Dye supra, 20; Wagga Wagga Aboriginal Action Group v Eldridge (1995) EOC 92-701, 78-266.
    (c) “Incite,” “hatred”, “contempt” and “ridicule” should all be given the ordinary natural meaning i.e. to incite - urge on, stimulate or prompt to action cf Burns v Dye supra para 19; John Fairfaz Publications Ltd v Kazak supra para 40.
    (d) It is not necessary that it be proved that any particular person was incited but that the capacity of the public act to incite the ordinary reasonable person is what must be made out cf Deen v Lamb [2001] QADT 20 see also John Fairfax Publications Ltd v Kazak supra; Catch the Fire Ministries v Islamic Council of Victoria [2006] VSCA 284; Burns v Laws (No 2) [2007] NSWADT 47.
    (e) The incitement to hatred must be on “the grounds of sexuality” meaning that that matter was a “substantially contributing factor” cf Waterhouse v Bell (1991) 25 NSWLR 99, 106 per Clark JA; Veloskey supra, Burns v Dye supra at para 24. Sexuality is defined in the Act’s scheduled Dictionary as inter alia homosexuality.
    http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/q...T/2007/27.html

    The Victorian case of Catch the Fire Ministries v Islamic Council of Victoria also sets out very clearly (in regard to similarly worded Victorian leglislation) what the test for whether something incites the relevant emotion is:

    Section 8 does not prohibit statements about religious beliefs per se or even statements which are critical or destructive of religious beliefs. Nor does it prohibit statements concerning the religious beliefs of a person or group of persons simply because they may offend or insult the person or group of persons. The proscription is limited to that which incites hatred or other relevant emotion and s.8 must be applied so as to give it that effect.
    http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/si...ta2001265%20s8

    The theme is quite clear: Hate speech is - Speech + ability to incite hatred + of a marginalised group. The ability to incite and the vulnerability of the group of persons subject to it are what separates from other forms of insult.

    Article 4(a) of the Convention on the elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination agian repeats the notion of incitement against the group as being the basis for outlawing hateful speech:

    (a) Shall declare an offence punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination, as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin, and also the provision of any assistance to racist activities, including the financing thereof;
    http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Professional...ages/CERD.aspx

  18. #368
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    9,293

    Default

    You know, since there are so many examples of hate speech laws in more progressive countries, why don't the people arguing against them show examples of how they've led to destroying ideas or silencing good people for no reason? Because as far as I'm concerned, those countries seem to be doing pretty fine in the speech and idea department. You'd be arguing to unban hate speech in their countries at this point in time.
    Quote Originally Posted by chuboy View Post
    Quick, someone get the scientific community onto this one! A truly brilliant hypothesis that would have been insofar overlooked by every researcher who has contributed to this field of science. And it's only 8th grade stuff!
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Zero
    I roam Johto with my partner Pokemon, Rattata, who knows Hyper Fang, Sunny Day, Rock Smash and Cut. Anyone who runs with more than one Pokemon or evolves their Pokemon takes the game way too seriously.

  19. #369
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    351

    Default

    Wow... lots here...

    Okay then. Talking about such things makes me nervous. It's important, but it's not much fun. I'd rather talk about Pokemon, or b-movies, or video games, or old websites, or computers, or something more interesting, but this i an important topic.

    Um... This is hard to talk about.

    Okay. Let's stay away from hot button issues. They make the blood boil, & everyone looses objectivity when talking about them. Let's try these statements:

    1) Using dogs as a source of meat is wrong.
    2) Countries where dogs are used as a source of meat are backwards.
    3) Countries where dogs are used as a source of meat should stop doing so.
    4) People who eat dog meat are evil.
    5) People who eat dog meat should be tortured.

    Of these which is hate speech? I'd say #5 is for sure, 2, 3, & 4 are borderline. #1 is the hard one. Its not directly threatening anyone, but could lead to the other 4.

    While I'm here, I might as well address this:
    yeah, i have rights. they weren't documented the first few hundred years or so, but I have some. more proof that they're a human based concept. the fact that we never always had our rights (in a way, we still don't anyway) and had to fight institutions and systems mostly controlled by white people should be plenty proof that 'right' is not some god-given law.
    You've always had rights, GhostAnime. Even 100 years ago you had Rights endowed by your Creator. The form of government at the time was destructive of these Rights, so the Right to alter it was invoked. http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/cn...-rightshttp://
    Last edited by pacman000; 17th February 2017 at 4:20 PM.
    † I am a Christian and not ashamed of it! Copy and paste this into your sig if you are too.†

    https://websitering.neocities.org/

  20. #370
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    9,293

    Default

    Even 100 years ago you had Rights endowed by your Creator.
    Um, let's not get into religion for obvious reasons.

    I point you again though to Asian Americans, early 1940s.
    Quote Originally Posted by chuboy View Post
    Quick, someone get the scientific community onto this one! A truly brilliant hypothesis that would have been insofar overlooked by every researcher who has contributed to this field of science. And it's only 8th grade stuff!
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Zero
    I roam Johto with my partner Pokemon, Rattata, who knows Hyper Fang, Sunny Day, Rock Smash and Cut. Anyone who runs with more than one Pokemon or evolves their Pokemon takes the game way too seriously.

  21. #371
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    *sigh* Ohio
    Posts
    7,560

    Default

    People who eat dog meat wouldn't really be involved in hate speech issues anyway. Someone who tortures dogs would obviously be animal abuse laws instead.

  22. #372
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bobjr View Post
    People who eat dog meat wouldn't really be involved in hate speech issues anyway. Someone who tortures dogs would obviously be animal abuse laws instead.
    and that's only if they're raising the dogs inhumanely. Depends on a lot of aspects, but eating dogs is just about as normal as raising cows and eating them imo, just different cultures.

  23. #373
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    616

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lemoncatpower View Post
    and that's only if they're raising the dogs inhumanely. Depends on a lot of aspects, but eating dogs is just about as normal as raising cows and eating them imo, just different cultures.
    Is the way they treat dogs much worse than how cows/chickens are treated in factories?

  24. #374
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    where u arent
    Posts
    263

    Default

    At worst it's comparable.

    At any rate, snorlax, what do you think of the Australian hate speech laws?

    Pokemon Showdown: chess-z
    Friend Code: 3883-9258-9472
    tumblr

    if u ever take issue with anything that i say let me know
    polite disagreement leads to enlightenment
    i claimed zoroark

    Quote Originally Posted by GhostAnime View Post
    a 3DS debater. nice.

  25. #375
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    2,421

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chess-z View Post
    Racism is racial prejudice plus power. Unless y'all honestly think that white people are disenfranchised and powerless, stop playing the reverse racism card.
    This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. You wouldn't declare a black or asian worker beating a white college man to death while they yell "Die white scum!" or "Kill all white babies!" to be innocent of a hate crime because it doesn't fit the mold of "prejudice plus power." The only thing prejudice plus power brings to the table is institutionalized and systemic racism. By doing this, you narrow racism to the specific parts and undermine the big picture. White people are a race and thus you can be racist to them.
    "Everyone creates the thing they dread. Men of peace create engines of war. Invaders create Avengers. People create... smaller people? Er... children! I lost the word there. Children. Designed to supplant them. To help them end."

    "Momentai!"

    But this is the traditional royal Canterlot voice! It is tradition to speak, using the Royal "we", and to use THIS MUCH VOLUME WHEN ADDRESSING OUR SUBJECTS!!

Page 15 of 22 FirstFirst ... 5111213141516171819 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •