Free Speech & What it Means to Americans? Your Thoughts?

[Carnal_Flower]

I live for the day Trump is frog-marched out of the WH to rousing chants of Lock Him Up

You have a secret crush on Donald Trump, don't you? And specifically, what is wrong? Let's see if you can create a post with the name "Trump" in it.

 

[Chris_Michael]

Always hated racists and homophobes even as a kid. Didn't know any homosexuals and only had one friend of non-white ethnicity but knew a few racists and homophobes who had never met a black or gay person. Truly stupid and evil people. The world would be far better off without them.

Luckily I live in a civilized country were racists and homophobes are not allowed to march. No need to chuck a brick at them if the police are on the scene.

But then you would have to define which groups are hate groups and which are not. Also, speech isn't limited to marches. Should I be arrested for saying feminism is a joke? Because that hurts people's feelings and people think it's misogynistic.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I am 100% fine with racists peacefully protesting just as much as I'm 100% fine with the Westboro Baptist Church for peacefully protesting. That does NOT mean I'm going to cheer them on. I'm going to sit back and think "Those are some dumb motherfuckers." Hell, I'm fine with BLM as long as they don't interfere with other people's rights (*ahem* gay pride parade) or committing criminal behavior such as rioting.

People always bring up the KKK. There are 5,000 - 8,000 KKK members. Do you really think they pose a threat to society? They have no power over anything. However, if they interfere with BLM, I would have a problem... but so would they because they'd be dead. (Edit: This is going to be misrepresented. I don't advocate for violence between the KKK and BLM but the point is that the KKK would not interfere because they'd be vastly outnumbered and the possibility of violence is high. Regardless, BLM has a right to free speech and the KKK does not have the right to interfere with BLM's rights.)

You almost have a cynical edge to the way you talk about bricks and harming people with them. How is that any different than using a firearm? Is a brick any less lethal? Does a brink have liberals Stamp of Approval as a dangerous weapon? What about a knife? Maybe? How about a rock? A sharpened rock? Slingshot? Bombs? Cars? Trucks?

As much as I hate BLM and the 3rd/4th wave feminist movement, I would never be against their freedom of speech. But that same common courtesy has to be considered with everybody, no matter how much it pains you to see or hear it. If it's peaceful, it's peaceful.

And that is the beauty of free speech. Arguments stand on their own merit rather than people using violence to silence another.

(Edit: Also, free speech does not exist on Lit, though Lit is very tolerant compared to other forums. Very tolerant. Lit is not obligated to allow free speech. It is a website, and just like any company, they can make decisions about what they allow and what they don't)

For a long time, I have had kind of a fantasy wherein the Nazis are holding some kind of march to celebrate Hitler's birthday or something like that. Their line of march and their schedule are known, because it is a legal expression, guaranteed by the First amendment. All along the way would be people with radios, and a local radio station is playing, over and over, things such as "Der Fuehrer's Face" and other mocking recordings. The radios would be playing these recordings at top volume and laughing at the strutting buffoons as they goose-stepped by.

 

[Chris_Michael]

I live for the day Trump is frog-marched out of the WH to rousing chants of Lock Him Up

That still won't change the fact that the House and Senate are R. But you have already demonstrated that you're not interested in bettering Dems to make them electable.

Your party is losing classic liberals. Reason and Logic are leaning towards Republicans. I would be surprised that a group of people who believe in a Sky Daddy and Big Man J would be the voice of reason, but then I see Dems supporting Islam.

I was telling a friend today about my transition (inb4 "from male to female") from Christian to Atheist, and I had a hard time explaining how it changed me politically. I was like, "Well, I wanted to give the Conservatives the middle finger only to realize that Democrats support a religion which is, if not worse, just as bad as Christianity." So, now I'm floating in this grey area of wtf? And I'm realizing that people who label themselves one way or another are just stupid fucks. It makes no sense whatsoever. I seriously thought the Dems were supposed to be logical and rational, but no... they're just idiots.

I really truly wanted to be liberal and I'm glad I know now that I'm more of a classical liberal. It's better than the two sides available now.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

I'm more than an atheist than you I would bet, and it's a choice between a party who wants to keep religion out of gov't, and the Mike Pences and Steve Bannons who literally want to make this a Christian state. What the F were you thinking voting for Trump? You just handed the SC to the Fundies, the Dept of Education to Betsy psycho Christian DeVos, and destroyed the environment because you know, God doesn't believe in global warming.

Democrats don't "support" Islam. They support of freedom of religion and separation of Church and State. Thanks for voting for the complete opposite.

Hmmm, what's more reasonable and logical. Saying Global Warming is a Chinese Hoax, or, believing in actual science, hmmmm

You are out of your gourd. Completely disoriented.

But what do you expect, when you think a "vote" means "giving the middle finger to someone" instead of realizing Gee, maybe who I vote for has actual policies which might actually affect me, hmmm

You don't seem to have the most basic understanding of government.

That still won't change the fact that the House and Senate are R. But you have already demonstrated that you're not interested in bettering Dems to make them electable.

Your party is losing classic liberals. Reason and Logic are leaning towards Republicans. I would be surprised that a group of people who believe in a Sky Daddy and Big Man J would be the voice of reason, but then I see Dems supporting Islam.

I was telling a friend today about my transition (inb4 "from male to female") from Christian to Atheist, and I had a hard time explaining how it changed me politically. I was like, "Well, I wanted to give the Conservatives the middle finger only to realize that Democrats support a religion which is, if not worse, just as bad as Christianity." So, now I'm floating in this grey area of wtf? And I'm realizing that people who label themselves one way or another are just stupid fucks. It makes no sense whatsoever. I seriously thought the Dems were supposed to be logical and rational, but no... they're just idiots.

I really truly wanted to be liberal and I'm glad I know now that I'm more of a classical liberal. It's better than the two sides available now.

 

[Hard_Rom]

But then you would have to define which groups are hate groups and which are not. Also, speech isn't limited to marches. Should I be arrested for saying feminism is a joke? Because that hurts people's feelings and people think it's misogynistic.

Not arrested but if you made that statement in a bar and got a clip across the back of the head for being stupid you would have deserved it.

 

[Hard_Rom]

Limits on speech were incorporated in the criminal code in relation to treason, sedition, blasphemous and defamatory libel, disruption of religious worship, hate propaganda, spreading false news, public mischief, obscenity, indecency and other forms.

— Prof. Dominique Clément, University of Alberta

*spreading false news is illegal up here. is defamatory libel illegal in the US? if so that would be a limitation on free speech. how about indecency? is any and all pornography legal in the US?*

 

[Boxlicker101]

Not arrested but if you made that statement in a bar and got a clip across the back of the head for being stupid you would have deserved it.

I would take issue with that. You are hardly justified in assaulting somebody for saying something you find disagreeable.

When "Women's Lib" first came around, I thought it was a joke. Women were complaining they were stuck at home while their husbands (usually) went out to work. I looked at the women I knew and most of them held jobs and they were more interesting and challenging than the jobs held by most men. Personally, I would have rather worked in an office than on an assembly line making cars, which were the most common jobs held by women and men at the time.

This was a very long time ago.

 

[Chris_Michael]

Not arrested but if you made that statement in a bar and got a clip across the back of the head for being stupid you would have deserved it.

Wow, I'm honestly shocked.

That. Is. Bad.

You have no idea how anti-free speech you are.

Okay, wow... people disagree with me on this. I thought that this would be something we could agree on, but apparently not. I'm sorry you think that me being so highly critical of feminism is deserving of violence. That is just beyond my suspension of disbelief... but this is reality, which is weirder than fiction, I suppose.

Alright, we can agree to disagree. In the end, I respect your opinion despite my harsh tone here. We're just going to have to part ways on this issue.

 

[Chris_Michael]

I'm more than an atheist than you I would bet

Well no, let me correct you. You're definitely more atheism+ than I am.

 

[Wrong Element]

I'm really fascinated by these people -- a couple of folks on Lit come to mind -- who always thought of themselves as "liberals," but then realized they couldn't deal with being in a liberal movement where white men are in the minority (as they are in society at large).

But of course, it's everybody else who practices "identity politics."

 

[Chris_Michael]

I'm really fascinated by these people -- a couple of folks on Lit come to mind -- who always thought of themselves as "liberals," but then realized they couldn't deal with being in a liberal movement where white men are in the minority (as they are in society at large).

But of course, it's everybody else who practices "identity politics."

Well, it's when the message is "Fuck white people." That doesn't really sit well with me personally.

The reason we play identity politics is because we're thrown into the arena. I mean, you can't just throw out accusations of racism and sexism without me responding.

And you're still welcome to do it. But like I've said, it's like crying wolf. The words eventually lose all value because "everything is sexist and everything is racist" -Anita Sarkeesian.

I don't know what it's going to take for the far left to understand that they have separated themselves from classic liberals. That's why we have Trump. This is an argument that is always going to lead back to the results of the 2016 election. Now, what's going to happen in 2020? I'm not sure. Dems are going to have to be a bit more reasonable and not just count on the non-white vote.