41% of Americans want to abolish free speech

[Frederick Foresight]

There ARE other means of expressing their views, and they are vile and despicable. But rights go to everyone, not just people who say things you don't like.



Actually, I believe you or I could probably draw - and agree to - a line on this issue on what would be acceptable. The problem is that many others would not agree with our lines. And what makes our lines better than others? At the end of the day, people move on and only a government agency could enforce such a line. Government being the corruptible entity it is, that line would change over time and influence. Therein lies the problem.

So then why trust the government with any laws? Why are you suddenly drawing the line on this one? So to speak?

 

[Tsing Tao]

You keep ignoring the very posts that you are quoting. Thanks, but I've had my fill.

I'm not ignoring your posts at all, you just don't like my responses to them. I understand, it's difficult to debate something when you have no solution. So once again...

 

[Tsing Tao]

So then why trust the government with any laws? Why are you suddenly drawing the line on this one? So to speak?

Certain government HAS to enforce laws - because no one else will. There are issues like murder, theft, etc. that are black and white. Murder is bad. No one out there thinks we should kill each other, so there's a line in the sand: Don't kill. Same with theft. With any crime. Speech is not a crime. It was protected specifically in the Constitution. Any time there is a gray area, the line becomes fuzzy.

Give me an example of a gray area that government enforces that is protected by a Constitutional amendment.

 

[achilles28]

Most Americans are delusional hypocrites. They wrap themselves in the flag, and claim to love freedom. But they really don't. To them, voting to end freedom is freedom.

Freedom is slavery. War is peace. Up is down. Black is white. They're delusional shitheads. Leading the charge are Democraps.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

He has no solution. He just doesn't like things as they are now. That's OK, by the way. No one can debate someone not liking something, as it is personal choice and a right to not like something. But without a solution to present, the whole discussion is worthless. Potential solutions can be debated. If you simply show up and say "this sucks", well then there's no real debate, is there.

Identifying that a problem exists and that there is a need for a solution is the first step to arriving at one. Denying that a problem exists keeps thing where they are.

 

[Tsing Tao]

As with most problems, identifying that a problem exists and that there is a need for a solution is the first step to arriving at one. Denying that a problem exists keeps thing where they are.

I never said there was no problem. The church we discussed is a problem. Additionally, this problem has been "identified" many, many times, and the SC has ruled in the favor of protecting speech (the SC even ruled in favor of the West Baptist Church!). You don't like that, but you don't have an alternative. So you keep falling back on the "because something is bad, we shouldn't just let it be bad" silly commentary. But we think it's not bad enough to change how things are.

You want things to change, tell us what should change. We don't think things should change. So right now it's just your opinion vs. ours. Unless you can bring up some concrete idea, it's just you not liking it and us liking it the way it is.

There's no debate, there's just argument. That's what you're not getting.

 

[nitro]

Most Americans are delusional hypocrites. They wrap themselves in the flag, and claim to love freedom. But they really don't. To them, voting to end freedom is freedom.

Freedom is slavery. War is peace. Up is down. Black is white. They're delusional shitheads. Leading the charge are Democraps.

Godel pointed out that Democracy was inconsistent long ago...That within the very system, it could be taken down by its very own laws.

Logic as much as we want, does not apply to governments run by human beings.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

I'm not ignoring your posts at all, you just don't like my responses to them. I understand, it's difficult to debate something when you have no solution. So once again...

The post you quoted was not addressed to you. But thanks for the insult pic anyway.

 

[Tsing Tao]

The post you quoted was not addressed to you. But thanks for the insult pic anyway.

Ah, my apologies. I had thought you were referring to my discussion with you (which you then continued afterwards - that explains that), as it followed a similar text to the economics thread. Please accept my official retraction of that post.

However, if Monty Pyton is insulting to you, then perhaps I understand now why so much speech is offensive to you

 

[Tsing Tao]

Logic as much as we want, does not apply to governments run by human beings.

Which is precisely why government cannot be trusted to determine what is, and is not, hate speech, and never move the goal posts.