Being offended.

As well it should.This, along with the NAZIs, needs to be openly discussed on the national stage for all to see. Only an informed society can best determine how to react to political opinion whether that be NAZI hate speech or limiting the First Amendment to, somehow, limit speech we just don't like. We can only know the vile philosophy of the NAZI by hearing their hate speech. By legislating speech we drive it underground where it will fester and burn. At least in the open other movements in society can constantly throw water on hate groups.Hopefully this society can realize that if we can limit the hate speech of the NAZIs we can limit the very uncomfortable speech of Black Lives Matter and Planned Parenthood, as well. And the poor christians with their persecution complex ... is not saying Merry Christmas a form of hate speech? More than a few christian legislator's, especially at the state and local level, may not disagree.One of the big experiments in this country is to make the freedom of speech, and the demonstrations of opposition to what is said, absolute. Well, as absolute as we can without allowing them to incite immediate violent action.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Well duh. Just don't go making laws about your idea of bigotry.

---

That’s funny because your main concern seems to be about silencing any mention of bigotry on the right.

quote:

---

I already have.

---

No, you haven’t.

quote:

---

And there always will be. Racism was on decline from the 70s until Obama took office. It's hardly the problem it was, and the people fighting against it are pussies compared to fighting for it back when it wasn't popular to do so. I know because I have fought against it my whole life. Being against racism in the 70s and 80s was a lot different than today. It's a joke what I see today. Hardly worth the press it gets.

---

No, I don’t think that’s true. I think that there was a lot of racism there. The hate of a Black man winning the Presidency just made a lot of it more obvious.

quote:

---

I do.

---

You certainly haven’t discussed that. Trump stirring up hate against Mexicans is worrying because of the potential for harm - broadly considered - against anyone perceived as Mexican in the US. Offence is hardly the real issue.

quote:

---

I do. Stop using it as some kind of justification. 2 wrongs do not make a right

---

You don’t try to discuss the faults of the right. You try to bully me into silence over them with your lies and your hate and your false accusations. And calling for honest discussion rather than political propaganda is hardly claiming that two wrongs make a right.

quote:

---

You really didn't address any of my points with fact. You are just name calling, what you do best and why you aren't taken seriously by me.

---

Your sole point was to falsely attack me with your hypocritical lies. None of them supported by fact.Now certainly you may run away because your nasty bullying tactics don’t work, but the very fact that you had to resort to them shows that you take me very seriously.

quote:

---

And again.

---

I think the fact that you can’t show anywhere that you were genuinely spreading love is proof enough. It’s pretty easy to find examples of hate in your posts here - but not love..

What does any of this have to do with the idea of teaching people not to be offended is better? Are you so in the dark that you don't see what is happening everyday? Are you just asking me these questions because you are avoiding the topic and you are just trying to find something to nit-pick about that has nothing to do with the topic? It's really not hard to use google.

Well put.

I see. So one has freedom of speech even if Antifa is beating your audience to a pulp and spraying mace in their faces, to the point that the speaker has to be hurried out the back door and never gets to speak at all. That's freedom of speech according to the Left I guess.

Antifa's method IS violent action. They beat people up.

You are ignoring my one simple point: The written documents of Islam directly address the reader with commands to murder infidels. That does not exist in the Bible or in any other religion that I know of. Some total ignoramus who thinks he's to obey commands addressed to the Israelites 3500 years ago is a ridiculous comparison. And besides, how many Christians do you know who have taken such a command from the Bible and shot up a crowd or drove into a crowd or did a suicide bombing as if commanded to do so?

I readily accept that Islam has a serious problem with radical extremists - that minority are vicious murdering bastards who deserve all the justice and resistance that civilised people can bring to the table.But to tar every Muslim with their brush is completely wrong. There are 1.8 billion followers of Islam who yesterday didn’t kill anyone. They didn’t the day before that, or before that, or as far back in our lifetimes as you care to go. I work with many Muslims - in the run up to Christmas, they made samosas for Christmas charities, which were delicious - and not even slightly poisoned. The vast majority of their scholars reject the interpretation you impose on those Quranic verses - using in many cases the same semantic gymnastics which you use to justify a living God ordering the massacre of children. You’re demonising 1.8 billion peace-loving, normal, live-a-day human beings as a result of the arguments of a vanishingly small minority of blood thirsty psychopaths. Something Jesus didn’t do, unless you can find me an instance where he instructed his followers to hate a whole load of people, based on the actions of a tiny percentage.

Did God command genocide or not? There are those who have attacked abortion centres. (You don't have to agree with abortion to see that as wrong.) Also, just maybe the west should be a lot more reticent about dropping bombs on foreign nations. It isn't the only way to resolve issues. I can't see where the average Iraqi is better off now than they were under Hussein. It is really just another group of thugs that have taken Hussein's place and in the meantime the west is responsible for the maiming and death of thousands of innocent Iraqis. That might have something to do with the west being seen as the enemy.

Deuteronomy 12:13-15, Faith. And unlike the bits of the Qur'an that give you conniptions, that's not taken out of context. Historically, lots of Christians have killed for Christianity. If fewer do so now it's because people don't believe so much any more --- no-one cares about usury any more, or thinks of giving all their money to the poor, or worries about voting for a man who has based his life on the Seven Deadly Sins rather than the Ten Commandments. The very good and the very bad of Christianity have alike drained out of society, leaving only a gritty residue of scientific ignorance, spiritual pride, and homophobia.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

That's illegal according to the Left.You should guess less often.

Converstations are good, aren't they?
You're not trying to prevent conversations as a way to "protect free speech," are you?
Again, it seems like you may be getting offended a bit too easily.Let me know when we get the point of attempting to implement legislation... which was the silly claim I was talking about.

Yes, nothing.Antifa smashing heads over "hate speech" is something despised by everyone.
There is no legislation being introduced in order to allow Antifa to smash heads.This is not meat in defense of any claim about PC-legislation being anything more than on the level of flat-earther attempts.200 posts now, and still nothing.Do you actually have anything to back up this claim about PC-legislation? Or do you just have nothing?