Reply With Quote
mass consensual hallucination
Joey just throws out words hoping they'll apply.
mass consensual hallucination
Of course it's false. That's like saying all priests are pedos. And "degenerate sexual bs" is entirely a personal opinion and moral construct, neither of which ever superseded speech rights.
Of course it exists. It has always existed. ie: Antisemitic and racist speech is well do ented in the history of this country. That it's a protected right in this country is what we're trying to point out. I shouldn't even need to tell you this, I know you know.
Hate speech is subjective bro. It most def doesn't exist unless it's you subjectively objecting to such speech that another person might not object to. It boils down to how you "feel" when confronted with "hate speech".
There's nothing subjective about "kill all the ni**as" or "gas all the jews". Like zero.
Or Al Sharpton saying "kill all white people" or hate speech like saying half of the American people are a basketful of deplorables because they dont agree with ya,,,,,,democrats dont like gays being called gots but they dont mind calling people deplorable and garbage,,,,,,
When did Sharpton say this?
Link, please.
If Sharpton said that, which he didn't, it would absolutely be hate speech.
Perfect example of disinformation/lies/propaganda...
No one called anyone deplorables - because they dont agree with anyone -
they are deplorables and are accurately labeled deplorable -
because they support behavior and criminality and treason -
which they very well know is....
deplorable behavior.
Facts are funny things...
Yes, language can offend, can lead to atrocities, but in the end language is just language. I don't agree with everything a bunch of people say but I also don't care to censor those I disagree with no matter how harsh their words, thinking, etc come across.
I'm not a baby back bro. I'm not easily offended like most here.
I'm not offended by it, if he did indeed say it, so it is subjective and most def not hate speech. Hate speech doesn't exist! Get out of your feelings already!
You say this as if the the Big Guy in the WH right now isn't some corrupt reject, same with his VP, his whole admin, and dems of the past.
You are such a dumb mother er.
But that's exactly what I'm pointing out, thank you for making my point for me.
The first amendment protects even the most awful hate speech from government censoring.
Government banning of books about da gays is somehow now permissible and unprotected by the first amendment, for some reason and you're 100% onboard with it.
Gone like a fart in the wind
You're literally arguing about putting sexual content in grade school, middle school, and high school libraries as if they're checking out Shakespeare. Gtfo!
What the is wrong with you? No one's talking about banning literature per say, we don't want our youth sexulized nor groomed! Understand?
Rofl kori saying "I'm not easily offended"
If his skin were any thinner he could have his bones tatted
Shakespeare contained plenty of sexual content, even if disguised as humor, etc given what was permitted at the time:
https://www.sparknotes.com/shakespea...eares-writing/
The question is what the is wrong with you? Why do you want to impose your moral values on other people via the government? What happened with big bad government censor bad?
Nice, dismissed without prejudice
Why do you want to sexualize small children using inappropriate material in school libraries
What small children read Shakespeare?
You'll have to describe what you mean by "sexualize" in this case.
Texas’ education board voted Nov. 22 to allow Bible-infused teachings in elementary schools
Free speech in Texas schools
What does infused mean?Texas’ education board voted Nov. 22 to allow Bible-infused teachings in elementary schools
Free speech in Texas schools
"sexualize" and "small children" are dubious claims at best. And who decides what's "inappropriate"? inappropriate to whom?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
