Well shit, let's just go one step further and eliminate all groups like this, mk? Christians, Muslims, Irish, Black, fuck 'em! They all have the potential to rise up and become the next Hitler, all in different ways. Right?
Well shit, let's just go one step further and eliminate all groups like this, mk? Christians, Muslims, Irish, Black, fuck 'em! They all have the potential to rise up and become the next Hitler, all in different ways. Right? [/b][/quote] Mmhmm, you are actually right.
Well shit, let's just go one step further and eliminate all groups like this, mk? Christians, Muslims, Irish, Black, fuck 'em! They all have the potential to rise up and become the next Hitler, all in different ways. Right? [/b][/quote] The flaw with your argument is that a Nazi isn't a race, religion, or ethnicity. In addition, none of these Christians, Muslims, Irish, or Blacks are concerned with racial purity and ethnic cleansing. Edit: Worded that completely wrong.
The flaw with your argument is that a Nazi isn't a race, religion, or ethnicity. In addition, none of these Christians, Muslims, Irish, or Blacks are concerned with racial purity and ethnic cleansing. Edit: Worded that completely wrong. [/b][/quote] Right on. Nazis are a category of criminals.
My point is, religion, race, ethnicity or belief system, it doesn't matter. Anyone has the potential to cause the damage Hitler did. Yes, they might not have a specific target, but I think they're more dangerous than a belief system like the Nazis, since their targets could be anyone. If you're going to revoke one groups freedom of speech, what is stopping anyone from revoking the ordinary citizens freedom of speech? They might be wretched people, but I think they deserve freedom of speech. Even if it isn't right.
The problem with that is that Nazis have an evil way of thinking, while religions, races, and ethnicities are overwhelmingly peaceful in their ways. Nazis carry a specific message of hate. None of the aforementioned groups target a sepcific people or have any will to do harm to another group of people, making them very different in contrast. What you're saying is that if we're going to allow people to spread messages of peace, then others who wish to destroy that peace by sending messages of hate is perfectly acceptable, when in fact it erodes the very meaning of spreading said peace. You're meant to establish order and peace, not allow it to be desecrated by one-dimensional views of hate.
Maybe I missed it, but I don't think the rules for freedom of speech ever said that the speech had to be deemed "good" or anything to be accepted. Simply, speech is speech. Might be hate speech, might be peace speech. Either way, everyone is promised freedom of speech. Wanna revoke that? Go to Uganda or Cambodia, I'm sure they do it there.
I feel that there's certain messages of hate from small groups that should be censored for the good of everyone else, I find. In the interest of everyone's well-being, certain people should be shut up. Their hate leads to violence and broken laws. And to uphold a lawful society, you must shut things down at the root problem. For example, should the KKK still be allowed to operate freely without persecution, just because they have a different message from others? Hate speech should not be welcomed by societies, and the people saying them need to be silenced for the best of everyone.
Mark: of the aforementioned groups target a sepcific people or have any will to do harm to another group of people, making them very different in contrast. Got to disagree here. Holy wars. Despite it being only a fraction of the people in that specific thing they do do it in the name of whatever thing they worship. and back it up with quotes from whatever 'holy book' they read some times look at christianity for example. (now i don't want you christians here getting all aggro on me here, you're just an example). boo to homosexuality, boo to a lot of things that are half decent blah blah blah. doesn't really promote peace does it each group has positive and negative values, its just a matter of how they balance out which determines whether we 'like' them or not moving on - yes some of those values should be suppressed, but then aren't we denying the right of free speech? overall though, despite those two being quite the lookers, their parents should be pimp-slapped as many times as possible imo
I feel that there's certain messages of hate from small groups that should be censored for the good of everyone else, I find. In the interest of everyone's well-being, certain people should be shut up. Their hate leads to violence and broken laws. And to uphold a lawful society, you must shut things down at the root problem. For example, should the KKK still be allowed to operate freely without persecution, just because they have a different message from others? Hate speech should not be welcomed by societies, and the people saying them need to be silenced for the best of everyone. [/b][/quote] I disagree. I don't think the government should be allowed to have that kind of control. Yes, first it would start out just silencing neo-Nazis et cetra, but soon you run into all kinds of gray area. Plus, silencing people like the KKK certainly isn't going to stop them, unless you want to track down every single one of them and lock them up in jail for the rest of their lives. Silencing them would do nothing more then fuel their fire and anger them more. That doesn't mean you have to sit back quietly--you have that free speech power to, so go and argue every chance you get, if you so desire. IMO, the USA has come a long way on the racism issue--yes it's still there, mostly in the forum subtle and degrading and degrading stereotypes, but people are much more open and tolerant then they were 50 years ago.
I feel that there's certain messages of hate from small groups that should be censored for the good of everyone else, I find. In the interest of everyone's well-being, certain people should be shut up. Their hate leads to violence and broken laws. And to uphold a lawful society, you must shut things down at the root problem. For example, should the KKK still be allowed to operate freely without persecution, just because they have a different message from others? Hate speech should not be welcomed by societies, and the people saying them need to be silenced for the best of everyone. [/b][/quote] Agreed 100%
I feel that there's certain messages of hate from small groups that should be censored for the good of everyone else, I find. In the interest of everyone's well-being, certain people should be shut up. Their hate leads to violence and broken laws. And to uphold a lawful society, you must shut things down at the root problem. For example, should the KKK still be allowed to operate freely without persecution, just because they have a different message from others? Hate speech should not be welcomed by societies, and the people saying them need to be silenced for the best of everyone. [/b][/quote] Dr. Martin Luther King easily stated it best when he said that violence and restrictive action, when followed to its logical end, are downward spirals. You can easily kill or censor the hater, but you have not eliminated the hate. By treating the EFFECTS of illogical/violent thought, you don't strike the root of anything, you only treat its symptoms, which are the people venting such hatred. Far and wide, the most effective way to eliminate the hatred, the root of the problem, is with information and knowledge. If, like I had proposed earlier, you make it widely known that something is incorrect or flawed, its supporters will wane, if not be eliminated. Look at how we scoff at slavery today. Was it the passed legislation that made the thought of slavery so rediculously inhumane? No, of course not, it was the knowledge of its rediculousness that LED to the legislation, not the other way around. The KKK should be allowed to say whatever they want. It's up to the people to know better, and once they do, such houses of shoddy logic will crumble. Passing legislation won't eliminate the thought that exists in their heads, it will only eliminate people the right to say what they think. Peace is not comprimised by people simply saying the words, peace is only comprimised when people don't have the mental ability to reject violence.
Got to disagree there: those people are extremists. Only a small portion of those groups are extremists. All Nazis are extremists with extremist views. Big difference. The main message of those groups is of peace, not of spreading hatred and racial purity like the Nazis.
Exactly. You can not justify ANY form of racism. It's a behavior we cannot accept anymore in our society, and moreover presents a threath to people's right to exist and enjoy equal rights.
Well things are different in Cambodia, supposedly. My dad did help in the process of drafting a constitution and such.
Dr. Martin Luther King easily stated it best when he said that violence and restrictive action, when followed to its logical end, are downward spirals. You can easily kill or censor the hater, but you have not eliminated the hate. By treating the EFFECTS of illogical/violent thought, you don't strike the root of anything, you only treat its symptoms, which are the people venting such hatred. Far and wide, the most effective way to eliminate the hatred, the root of the problem, is with information and knowledge. If, like I had proposed earlier, you make it widely known that something is incorrect or flawed, its supporters will wane, if not be eliminated. Look at how we scoff at slavery today. Was it the passed legislation that made the thought of slavery so rediculously inhumane? No, of course not, it was the knowledge of its rediculousness that LED to the legislation, not the other way around. The KKK should be allowed to say whatever they want. It's up to the people to know better, and once they do, such houses of shoddy logic will crumble. Passing legislation won't eliminate the thought that exists in their heads, it will only eliminate people the right to say what they think. Peace is not comprimised by people simply saying the words, peace is only comprimised when people don't have the mental ability to reject violence. [/b][/quote] Couldn't have said it better.