Originally posted by ZahlanziYour point is valid because you whined on the internet. :'(
your point is made valid because you called me an idiot. without it, it just wouldn't have the same kick to it. i mean what other use could a debate forum have other than pointing out the idiocy of some random from the internet?
Originally posted by sonhousethe problem is that yelling fire does constitute a danger. people trampling others, firemen dispatched to a false emergency and missing real emergencies, etc.
So it's ok for nutters to go around like that but its not ok to show emotions about them? I said I could CONSIDER a hate killing, that is not the same thing as actual killing.
Free speech proponents never considered the kind of nut job cases these individuals represent. It seems to me that kind of activity should be considered in the same light as falsely yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater.
however this is slightly different. they are causing emotional pain, and they are despicable. but someone has to put a signature on a law that forbids them to speak that particular "string of words". who is qualified to do that? what if that someone will decide next that people aren't allowed to protest against the war in iraq because it causes mental anguish to the soldiers there? or that people aren't allowed to speak against the elected government.
i don't believe that banning those hate speeches would necessarily lead to a total censorship of everything. but it sets a precedent.
Originally posted by ZahlanziSo you think they are harmless? What about the emotional distress caused by these asssholes when they harass people at the funeral of their loved ones? That is harmless? Aren't those poor folks under enough stress already with a loved one killed in a hate crime to have to undergo that same hate TWICE? The people at the funeral were not even gay, just the parents of a gay dude. What right do those so-called baptists have to interfere with ANYONE's funeral much less one who died in a hate crime.
they are not feeding themselves. they are harmless and should be treated as such. will youy be offended if a drunk insane hobo calls you an idiot on the street? no, you move on and probably feel sorry for him. picture this: that hobo calls you and idiot, then you call him an idiot, then you both start yelling at each other. from the outside, it looks like y ...[text shortened]...
never engage an idiot in argument. you have the disadvantage of feeling the need to make sense.
Sounds almost like you would rather have the distress of such people than have controls on freedom of speech.
Originally posted by Palynkai presented a point. i didn't whined about it. i didn't call anyone an idiot even if i don't agree with some.
Your point is valid because you whined on the internet. :'(
feel free to disprove it if you can. so far you thought calling someone an idiot would be more productive than actually proving that someone is an idiot (or their particular argument is) and allowing others to form that opinion.
Originally posted by ZahlanziI wonder what stance you would take if it were YOUR gay son killed by a hate group then harassed at his funeral by yet another hate group?
i presented a point. i didn't whined about it. i didn't call anyone an idiot even if i don't agree with some.
feel free to disprove it if you can. so far you thought calling someone an idiot would be more productive than actually proving that someone is an idiot (or their particular argument is) and allowing others to form that opinion.
1 edit
Originally posted by ZahlanziI already "disproved" it, it's right after I called you an idiot. You chose to ignore my statement and wrote a post just whining about being insulted.
i presented a point. i didn't whined about it. i didn't call anyone an idiot even if i don't agree with some.
feel free to disprove it if you can. so far you thought calling someone an idiot would be more productive than actually proving that someone is an idiot (or their particular argument is) and allowing others to form that opinion.
Seriously, how thick can you be?
Originally posted by sonhouseLike I said to our thick Romanian friend, it's not about free speech. It's just harassment to come and disturb a funeral so they can reach a bigger audience. They can say what they want to say elsewhere, there is no censorship of content.
So you think they are harmless? What about the emotional distress caused by these asssholes when they harass people at the funeral of their loved ones? That is harmless? Aren't those poor folks under enough stress already with a loved one killed in a hate crime to have to undergo that same hate TWICE? The people at the funeral were not even gay, just the pa ...[text shortened]... ike you would rather have the distress of such people than have controls on freedom of speech.
Originally posted by sonhousei was under a considerable amount of emotional distress when palinka called me an idiot. i grieved for days (wait, it was only 1.2 seconds but close enough). must i call for his imediate removal from the face of the planet? should he be placed in shackles and gagged? how about the mothers of dead soldiers in irak calling the government murderers? don't they know that seriously makes the government sad?
So you think they are harmless? What about the emotional distress caused by these asssholes when they harass people at the funeral of their loved ones? That is harmless? Aren't those poor folks under enough stress already with a loved one killed in a hate crime to have to undergo that same hate TWICE? The people at the funeral were not even gay, just the pa ...[text shortened]... ike you would rather have the distress of such people than have controls on freedom of speech.
democracy is an evil thing. the problem is that it is the best we got. To enforce democracy, some calous things must happen. innocent men are sent to prison (or death row) because the evidence points against them and because there isn't an omniscient being that would look into the eyes of the dude sentenced to death for murdering his daughters and realize he is in fact innocent and the evidence is false, a-holes like falwell or westboro baptist church or neo-nazis spout hate so that the honest journalist can post an article exposing corruption in a government without fear of being prosecuted and the article covered up.
"Sounds almost like you would rather have the distress of such people than have controls on freedom of speech"
it doesn't sound like. it is. i do not want controls on free speech. i do not trust anyone with such power. sadly that means that those people will have more pain , and have another bad memory about an already gruesome death. and when they will themselves take to the street with a sign that says "westboro baptist church are evil maggots", nobody will be allowed to stop them expressing their opinion.
" The people at the funeral were not even gay, just the parents of a gay dude" 😀 what's that suppose to mean? not even gay? that their grief is more grave and attention worthy because they are "normal" (i know you didn't mean anything bad, it only sounds that way)
Originally posted by ZahlanziWhat I mean is they were desecrating a grave basically, not even there to protest the parents, but still harassing a gay person even after death. That is particularly ghoulish is you ask me. The obviously don't know the meaning of Rest In Peace.
i was under a considerable amount of emotional distress when palinka called me an idiot. i grieved for days (wait, it was only 1.2 seconds but close enough). must i call for his imediate removal from the face of the planet? should he be placed in shackles and gagged? how about the mothers of dead soldiers in irak calling the government murderers? don't they ...[text shortened]... se they are "normal" (i know you didn't mean anything bad, it only sounds that way)
1 edit
Originally posted by PalynkaI don't think they are after attention, just nuts. They would not care if nobody paid attention, they would do it anyway.
Like I said to our thick Romanian friend, it's not about free speech. It's just harassment to come and disturb a funeral so they can reach a bigger audience. They can say what they want to say elsewhere, there is no censorship of content.
Originally posted by sonhouseprobably i would continue griefing. the amount of sorrow i already felt would be much greater than anything those aholes could inflict on me. i would remember those are zealous aholes that have nothing in common with the teachings of jesus.
I wonder what stance you would take if it were YOUR gay son killed by a hate group then harassed at his funeral by yet another hate group?
the above are definetely true. of course, writing about a hypothetical situation and actually living it is different. in addition to those above i might be blind with rage, with the sense of unfairness and do something i would really regret. i might want to inflict the pain i feel on a protester and forget that possibly an innocent child left at home of that protester would feel the same way i feel now. i might forget that that protest is so mindblowingly idiotic that the protesters can hardly be considered human so why the heck am i being offended by animals barking.
lots of things. however i would most definetely want to forbid someone to speak their mind.
1 edit
Originally posted by sonhouseWhy would I use Romanian as a pejorative? 😕
I don't think they are after attention, just nuts. They would not care if nobody paid attention, they would do it anyway. Besides, I am Irish, not Romanian. I assume you used that as a pejorative.
Read the post again.
Edit - Oh, and if they're not after attention, why pick THIS funeral? They could have picked from hundreds of funerals that wouldn't give them this attention.
Originally posted by Palynkayou added the nationality of someone in their description. what was the point? are there 2 zahlanzis on this site that you need to point out the romanian one? only 2 others participate in the discussion, would you think sonhouse wouldn't get who you are refering too, especially since you did mention it is the thick one.
Why would I use Romanian as a pejorative? 😕
Read the post again.
Edit - Oh, and if they're not after attention, why pick THIS funeral? They could have picked from hundreds of funerals that wouldn't give them this attention.
yeh, it was a pejorative. or you are in the habit of adding pointless bits of information without thinking about it. thought judging from the manner of "disproving" my claim, the latter isn't that unlikely.
1 edit
Originally posted by ZahlanziSad to see you view your own nationality as a pejorative. I don't.
you added the nationality of someone in their description. what was the point? are there 2 zahlanzis on this site that you need to point out the romanian one? only 2 others participate in the discussion, would you think sonhouse wouldn't get who you are refering too, especially since you did mention it is the thick one.
yeh, it was a pejorative. or you ...[text shortened]... t. thought judging from the manner of "disproving" my claim, the latter isn't that unlikely.
Seriously, the sheer amount of stupidity that oozes from your posts is remarkable.