General Discussion

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)

72. Your act is getting old because you are so deeply wrong and also because you are

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 12:40 PM

Sep 2012

so evasive. You are correctly afraid of saying what you are actually advocating, so you keep repeating the same points which vast amounts of DUers reject.
I think what you, OP, would like are anti blasphemy laws which protect some religions (yours) from criticism while allowing those religions to attack others with full voiced, unhinged rhetoric. That's my guess. At any rate, no one here is buying what you are selling. Never will.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

75 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Limiting Hate Speech In America Is A Valid Debate [View all] Jessy169 Sep 2012 OP

this is not going to wash. cali Sep 2012 #1

Horizontal peer 2 peer democracy and self-regulation tama Sep 2012 #8

DU is a private for profit corporation Riftaxe Sep 2012 #47

Let's address cash speech first. sadbear Sep 2012 #2

Money is speach, a promise tama Sep 2012 #12

And who gets to determine what constitutes "hate speech"?? Bad_Ronald Sep 2012 #3

Peer 2 peer juries, like here on DU? tama Sep 2012 #10

DU is not governed by the First Amendment. former9thward Sep 2012 #26

That's the point. tama Sep 2012 #30

Oh, brother. Yes, let's build a million more court-houses for "hate speech" cases. WinkyDink Sep 2012 #62

I don't understand how the OP can't see the danger Impious Sep 2012 #66

Yes, it's a legitimate debate, JoeyT Sep 2012 #4

Excellent post, JoeyT... shrdlu Sep 2012 #16

When I'm called to jury service on DU tama Sep 2012 #31

No. Not just "no", but HELL FUCKING NO! Edweird Sep 2012 #38

Deny Jebus is our one true lord and savior and you get sent to the pokey Major Nikon Sep 2012 #57

Privatizing social security is also a Valid Debate cthulu2016 Sep 2012 #5

+1,000! Zalatix Sep 2012 #6

Censorship by any other name is the repealed Fairness Doctrine. Octafish Sep 2012 #7

I don't think I can agree zellie Sep 2012 #9

The problem is that not all good speech cancels bad or hate speech. xchrom Sep 2012 #11

One more time: Who decides what is hate speech? cali Sep 2012 #15

Do you want to go to prison for saying "Fuck the Pope for hating gay people"? (nt) Nye Bevan Sep 2012 #58

Member of the same community here, and I disagree with you fully. Bluenorthwest Sep 2012 #68

there is so much wrong with your post. cali Sep 2012 #13

This message was self-deleted by its author AnotherMcIntosh Sep 2012 #27

K&R Cali! X 1000 COLGATE4 Sep 2012 #49

Totally, 100% agree n/t Oilwellian Sep 2012 #59

just wait til someone decides YOUR position is hate speech n/t ProdigalJunkMail Sep 2012 #14

Alert it tama Sep 2012 #32

Here's my valid debate glacierbay Sep 2012 #17

I'm just a little confused. zellie Sep 2012 #20

I don't understand it either glacierbay Sep 2012 #23

The point is that it is a valid debate Jessy169 Sep 2012 #29

My answer remains the same glacierbay Sep 2012 #60

Blahdeblahblah. It isn't "ironic" in the least, because, AHEM, your OP has not been deleted. WinkyDink Sep 2012 #61

IMO the problem is more that we live in a connected world now. CJCRANE Sep 2012 #18

It's like the news... Lightbulb_on Sep 2012 #64

Do they even teach Civics in schools anymore? If they do, you apparently weren't paying Egalitarian Thug Sep 2012 #19

+1 and well said. nt Codeine Sep 2012 #40

+1 sarcasmo Sep 2012 #48

People don't have a right not to be offended. Odin2005 Sep 2012 #21

but...but... Bad_Ronald Sep 2012 #25

A Message To Frank Collins... KharmaTrain Sep 2012 #28

It's already illegal to incite or commit crime with hate speech. porphyrian Sep 2012 #22

No thanks SickOfTheOnePct Sep 2012 #24

+1 sarcasmo Sep 2012 #50

You say "fervid First Amendment absolutist" Nye Bevan Sep 2012 #33

Wish I could rec a post n/t SickOfTheOnePct Sep 2012 #34

For the win. nt Codeine Sep 2012 #41

+1 n/t tammywammy Sep 2012 #55

I believe your posts may have an ulterior motive. Edweird Sep 2012 #35

one mans junk is another mans treasure ruffburr Sep 2012 #36

Yes, our strict beliefs in total free speech gives you the right 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #37

So if I say someones religion or some part of it is stupid ...that's hate speech? pffft! L0oniX Sep 2012 #39

I think you are very very wrong Marrah_G Sep 2012 #42

Yep= this is the third or fourth post COLGATE4 Sep 2012 #51

I have an idea - let's take the lowest common denominator and make that the bar Taverner Sep 2012 #43

Oh, look. Pakistani Federal Railways Minister Haji Ghulam Ahmed Bilour agrees with you! MNBrewer Sep 2012 #44

You can debate it all you want, but "hate speech" can be used as a catch-all term. Socal31 Sep 2012 #45

Speech restrictionists are a scary bunch. The First Amendment is always their biggest impediment. tritsofme Sep 2012 #46

Your quote DonCoquixote Sep 2012 #52

Try reading the First Amendment again. You think Jefferson didn't know about "hate speech"?? WinkyDink Sep 2012 #53

Its good to see the discussion going on, its also good to see its a very small group ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #54

Would This Be Permitted Or Prohibited Under Your New Interpetation Of The First Amendment? DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2012 #56

Freedom of speech is a fundamental right in my book. MichaelMcGuire Sep 2012 #63

I think the OP has a problem distinguishing hatred of a notion versus hatred of an individual Impious Sep 2012 #65

This is an extremely naive and foolish viewpoint. MicaelS Sep 2012 #67

What is the point of arguing this OVER and OVER without at least looking at the case law (briefly?) Romulox Sep 2012 #69

+1000 n/t SickOfTheOnePct Sep 2012 #70

Once again, the Absolutetists... 99Forever Sep 2012 #71

Your act is getting old because you are so deeply wrong and also because you are Bluenorthwest Sep 2012 #72

I would bet, too, that the OP seeks protection of her own religion Impious Sep 2012 #73

No, thank you. I support freedom of speech, and that includes the right to speak hatefully NYC Liberal Sep 2012 #74

I would like to know how you came to the conclusion that... Impious Sep 2012 #75