General Discussion

Nye Bevan

(25,406 posts)

13. Nope. Was your OP referring to hate speech on DU?

Reply to RobertEarl (Reply #8)

Wed Jan 7, 2015, 09:22 PM

Jan 2015

Or hate speech in general?

Because the proper response to hate speech on DU is to alert it and have a jury hide it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

76 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What is the proper response to hate speech? [View all] philosslayer Jan 2015 OP

More speech. Including derision and ridicule when appropriate (nt) Nye Bevan Jan 2015 #1

DU locks and hides speech all the time RobertEarl Jan 2015 #8

DU is a private website, not a government REP Jan 2015 #9

So we can put you down as no problem with limiting speech? RobertEarl Jan 2015 #21

We can put me down as knowing what a private website is REP Jan 2015 #25

Newspapers and TV news programs aren't government run in USA either. MADem Jan 2015 #67

Nope. Was your OP referring to hate speech on DU? Nye Bevan Jan 2015 #13

Interesting... whatchamacallit Jan 2015 #15

Wow. Why are people having so much trouble with this? Nye Bevan Jan 2015 #24

So you wouldn't advocate censoring whatchamacallit Jan 2015 #33

There's a big wide world out there outside of DU. (nt) Nye Bevan Jan 2015 #41

You didn't answer if you find any censorship of hate speech (outside DU) acceptable whatchamacallit Jan 2015 #49

I agree with NuclearDem Nye Bevan Jan 2015 #59

You wrote: RobertEarl Jan 2015 #17

More speech outside the confines of private websites and forums, Nye Bevan Jan 2015 #29

Are you clear yet? RobertEarl Jan 2015 #42

You're right. Nye Bevan Jan 2015 #45

Right you are RobertEarl Jan 2015 #48

No, it doesn't. NuclearDem Jan 2015 #53

No it is not--Locking and Hiding are forms of speech--not censorship MADem Jan 2015 #69

Last I checked, Skinner and MIRT didn't have the power to fine you or throw you in prison. NuclearDem Jan 2015 #32

Yeah RobertEarl Jan 2015 #37

Bingo. nt cwydro Jan 2015 #63

The answer is always MORE SPEECH REP Jan 2015 #2

The cartoons were really hateful. I hardly think we need more of that shit. CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #6

So, should we have denounced the Zombie Nativity scene that included Zombie Baby Jesus? geek tragedy Jan 2015 #7

You can call it hate speech, but that won't make it into hate speech REP Jan 2015 #14

Leering, grotesque caricatures engaged in lewd acts CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #30

speech is not allowed on a 'do we need that' basis geek tragedy Jan 2015 #35

I don't want to restrict free speech CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #58

Neither one of us gets to decide that REP Jan 2015 #47

I'm not trying to decide for them CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #51

Who's this "we"? REP Jan 2015 #57

And I clearly wasn't trying to speak for you CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #65

Impiety towards your deity is irreverence, not hate speech REP Jan 2015 #3

And what is "impiety" to religions not yours, including gross sexual references? Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #4

How in the fuck would any person be able to know all the things that might be 'impious' to some Bluenorthwest Jan 2015 #16

Why do you not ask the fellow who raised the question, why hound me with gratuitous vulgarity? Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #20

Still impiety. REP Jan 2015 #19

One mans impiety is another man's hate. philosslayer Jan 2015 #26

Wrong. Impiety is directed at a set of beliefs. Hate is directed at people. Coventina Jan 2015 #31

Now your sophomoric attempts have been exposed, you're trying to deem blasphemy against geek tragedy Jan 2015 #34

You don't get to define it, either REP Jan 2015 #39

blasphemy is not hate speech. learn the difference. geek tragedy Jan 2015 #5

This, a billion times. REP Jan 2015 #22

Can we do so to the Jewish religion? RobertEarl Jan 2015 #28

Judaism REP Jan 2015 #36

A Family Guy episode this past XMAS portrayed Jesus as a player... Drunken Irishman Jan 2015 #66

We can do so to any religion. But you instantly went after the believers in the religion not the Bluenorthwest Jan 2015 #38

What is the answer to all of the above seveneyes Jan 2015 #10

More speech. First you have to make a case that mockery and derision of a religion is 'hate speech' Bluenorthwest Jan 2015 #11

As an atheist, my life is blasphemous. MineralMan Jan 2015 #12

Can we make fun of atheists? RobertEarl Jan 2015 #27

Sure, as far as I am concerned. MineralMan Jan 2015 #40

Don't take it personal RobertEarl Jan 2015 #43

Life of Brian is also hate speech. Are atheist billboards hate speech? alphafemale Jan 2015 #18

No, it wasn't CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #44

Is this hate speech? alphafemale Jan 2015 #50

No CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #55

It was to portray the most extremist, violent Muslims in a demeaning manner. alphafemale Jan 2015 #60

Life of Brian is not hate speech. egduj Jan 2015 #71

I don't thing Life of Brian is hate speech. But some do. alphafemale Jan 2015 #72

Blasphemy is a victimless crime. nt msanthrope Jan 2015 #23

I don't see how this changes anything LittleBlue Jan 2015 #46

I think yopu need to learn what hate speech is. HERVEPA Jan 2015 #52

Mohammed was a mentally ill pedophile. <-- That's not hate speech. Xithras Jan 2015 #54

He satirized a lot more than Islam TexasMommaWithAHat Jan 2015 #56

Charlie did not engage in hate speech. I challenge your precept on point Jan 2015 #61

Well, obviously not wholesale slaughter. MADem Jan 2015 #62

One thing that is not a proper response is victim blaming (nt) LostOne4Ever Jan 2015 #64

Speech restrictionists are far more dangerous than those who draw pictures of fictional characters tritsofme Jan 2015 #68

Charlie Hebdo is a hate speech rag. egduj Jan 2015 #70

Define "hate speech". Warren Stupidity Jan 2015 #73

One might imagine your augment against Volatire is absurd and lacks rational thought. I certainly LanternWaste Jan 2015 #74

Criticism and ridicule are equivalent to hate speech?? prayin4rain Jan 2015 #75

I disagree with you, Hebdo did NOT engage in hate speech- political/ religious cartoons are NOT hate Sunlei Jan 2015 #76