More liberal censorship
- Thread starter Jefferson
- Start date
hate speech is speech that attacks a person or group on the basis gender, ethnic origin, religion, race, disability, or sexual orientation. in this country speech becomes hate speech whenis forbidden because it incites violence or prejudicial action against a protected individual or group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected individual or group.
So calling for a ban on immigration of a religious group qualifies as hate speech.
So calling for a ban on immigration of a religious group qualifies as hate speech.
While Islam is a serious threat to our Judeo-Christian based culture and laws, Donald Trump isn't the person that should be leading the fight against it (many of his followers are extremely violent and have no respect for the rule of law).
There Were More Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes Last Year Than Any Year Since 2001
Researchers are asking whether Donald Trump’s hateful rhetoric has anything to do with it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hate-crimes-muslims-since-911_us_57e00644e4b04a1497b59970
WonderfulLordJesus
New member
Bull! Where do you live? Who are you? Deign yourself the fiat snowflake legislator? Hate speech has no fixed legal meaning in the U.S. Law does not define evil ideas, being rude or unpatriotic, a host of ideas people may be offended by as some sort of unprotected speech, and this since the negation of the Alien and Sedition Acts by Thomas Jefferson. You have zero right not to be offended, and less that zero right to challenge anybody's political persuasion or proposals, absent criminal action on their part.
If your ilk, personally, want to avoid unpleasant speech, you'd be best advised to find a banana republic, perhaps look for a nation in Africa named Wussgeria, or within the artic circle, of a more favorable climate where your snowflake rears won't melt, as you are never going to win friends and influence people, outside such as the twisted homo or Fascist Muslim mindset, going after the First Amendment. The Constitution vigorously proclaims freedom of speech, but the Constitution not one whit protecting problems snowflakes have with being pathologically thin skinned. I would also think people of such makeup would be especially careful, who cry to Mommy their delicate ears have been "incited," that they be very careful trying to negate the God given civil rights of people who take the First Amendment deadly serious, freedom the likes wars have been fought over, that, if you had any sense, you'd be watching what you incite in people with much tougher skins.
Tell you what. Try thinking for ten seconds. Who's to say it's you who, in perpetuity, gets to define your imaginary hate speech laws? You want to play that game, let's call all non-Biblical, morally offensive speech hate speech that offends the faithful, and round up all totalitarian, Nazi and antichrist, wannabe oppressive liberal freakazoids and other offensive wannabe dictatorial perverts, who pervert everything around them. Then deport them to Wussgeria. Get the picture, Einstein?
Wow, someone is not getting enough fiber in their diet.
WonderfulLordJesus
New member
That’s the sort of real cogent defense one would expect of the liberal mind. Not that I blame you. People morally and intellectually bankrupt of a real argument for evil and boneheaded ideas just wind up there, every time, and thank you for that display of your true mentality, or lack thereof. And you, who are only worth some lame one-liner by way of defending your perverse concepts, aren’t really worth this reply, but may as well. I have a little time to waste.
You're the one idiotically bloviating suppression and forbidden speech that's a figment of liberals' diseased, totalitarian imaginations. Just listen to yourself, telling everybody what's forbidden. Lala land. Liberals speak of tolerance, yet have no tolerance of anybody who doesn't tow the liberal party line, even defining political dissent against things many find perverse or plain stupid forbidden, which is an evil and venomous, anti-freedom liberal wetdream that people be sanctioned for dissenting speech. As a matter of fact, liberals are the most intolerant of all political persuasions in the U.S., short of the KKK. Your very concept of hate speech is hate speech against your critics, to the point you have this perverse imagining critical speech is forbidden them. Forbidden by whom, pray tell? If somebody were to say they don’t think Muslims should get visas and illegal Mexicans need to get kicked back across the border, whatever aspects of that are ignorant or ill conceived, what are you proposing to do about somebody saying that? How is it forbidden? If I say all the mayhem is, indeed, Islamic terrorism, what do you propose to do about it?
If my problem is not enough fiber, your problem is living in some liberal lala land of snowflakes and political correctness, oblivious the rights of others, with diarrhea of the brain bursting forth and leaking on to your little Nazi fingers and keyboard. As a matter of fact, it’s your ilk the Constitution and firearms are meant to guard against, though I have great difficulty perceiving snowflakes a real threat. Like you’re really going to come after us to govern our pens and tongues. Uh huh.
Why is it wrong to hate a religion?
Those who hate Christianity wouldn't think anything wrong with that. That aside- It's not the hate its the advocating of discrimination and/or violence that qualifies something as hate speech.
WonderfulLordJesus
New member
Homosexuality is perversion. There is no such thing as homosexual marriage. The Lord God, Himself, is clear homosexuality is perversion, vile and disgusting, one of the many abominations of the wicked. Any pastor has the absolute right to refuse to participate in this vile perversion liberals created of uniting homos in holy matrimony.
Throw in that Islam is an antichrist, false religion, Allah the moon god, chosen from among hundreds of primitive Arabian temple, dumb idols, the history of the deception and Muhammed's lack of credentials as to having the power of God, as the Lord Jesus did, demonstrates Muhammed, therefore, failed to prove Islam has any validity, at all, the Quran no more real, at heart, than a Spiderman comic book and unable to save anybody from hell. And what we see of Islam only proves it breeds terrorism, serial killers on steroids, who worship a god of murder, who they claim rewards them with a cosmic brothel, for indiscriminately slaughtering other humans. John 8:44 states that, in fact, this is Satan at work.
Muslims should be as heavily screened as somebody who wants to work for the CIA, before being admitted to the U.S., for the safety of innocent people, for reasons of national security. Unfortunately, and innocent people are going to die because of this, in the White House is a man, demonstrably, in the employ of Satan in these areas. Millions of liberal scumbags share his evil and destructive views, and they are enemies of God. This being the case, what's worse, you not only have a problem with the evils of evil men, but also the problem of being a nation that has enshrined things offensive to God, as a result, a real problem, since God is not mocked.
I'm very prejudiced and discriminatory against unrepentant, openly homosexual or Muslims having any role in a Christian congregation, advocate ejecting anybody from the church building who advocates for these or any evils. I won't have and never will have any meaningful relationship with advocates of these evils. They would not be welcome in my home. They need to repent and believe the gospel of Jesus Christ, otherwise would do well to stay out of my space.
Also, I hate evil, generally, resoundingly condemn it. That's what I think. There are other views I hold as to the validity of abherrent human ideas and behavior of the world that would surely make the snowflakes cover their ears and run from the room, screaming for their liberal Mommies and blanket. What do you propose to do about it?
Last edited:
no, it's a normal variation of human sexuality.
Millions of married same gendered couples would disagree
along with Christmas trees and lobster bisque.
Unless that pastor is running a for profit business he is under no obligations to marry anyone.
Does this have a point or are you just ranting on a random topic?
Should we also be setting up concentration camps?
so if a homosexual lies and pretends to be heterosexual that would be just fine with you?
Pray for you and confront your hate with love and simple facts.
Religion is a choice. It is not something over which one has no control. Discriminating against someone for making a bad choice is wrong. And choosing a religion that advocates violence and murder against others simply because they don't follow that same religion is a bad choice.
I bet you don't think it's wrong to discriminate against someone if they are a known member of the KKK.
More liberal censorship
Trump has threatened to sue all the women who came forward after the video released followed by his denial that he ever "groped" women!
Trump has made some pretty bizarre assertions over the years but his personal wealth has insulated him from being held accountable like the rest of us.
Given that not everyone is a multi-billionaire who can afford to retain a legal staff indefinitely, isn't this just another example of "conservative" intimidation?
Trump has threatened to sue all the women who came forward after the video released followed by his denial that he ever "groped" women!
Trump has made some pretty bizarre assertions over the years but his personal wealth has insulated him from being held accountable like the rest of us.
Given that not everyone is a multi-billionaire who can afford to retain a legal staff indefinitely, isn't this just another example of "conservative" intimidation?
No.
No one is trying to intimidate anyone in this story, least of all any multi-billionaires or conservatives. By the way, Trump is only one of those things.
Of course he's trying to intimidate these women from going public, despite the fact that he freely admitted on the video that he was engaged in these practices.
Trump feels entitled to say or do whatever he pleases and then use his $billions to silence any of the "little people" who gets in his way!
it is wrong to discriminate against someone based on their affiliations with one group or another.
Facebook isn't discriminating against Mr. Trump. They are enforcing the rules that Trump agreed to when he signed on to Facebook.
This story isn't about what Trump is doing; it's about what Facebook is doing to him.
Why?
Except that he's running for President and therefore people need to know the things he says, as it shows his character so they can decide whether or not they want to vote for him. Facebook needs to amend their rules for situations like this.
So each time a gay calls a straight person a breeder, its hate speech and each time a skeptic or atheist makes fun of christianity, its hate speech, or each time a person attacks a white person for being white, its hate speech too ?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
imagine that i get a phone call - "Hi! I saw your ad for the chevy for sale and i'm interested. Please call me back at 123-4567. By the way, you might be interested in attending our klan rally next weekend!"
is it wrong for me to not return his call?
Of course it is, you shameful bigot, you should be right there with the white cap on your head showing your tolerance!
:chuckle: