Originally posted by FMF Have you used "hate speech" against Muslims on this web site?
mmm, dunno, cant remember. Ask proper knob, he remembers everything. I got
banned recently for calling someone fatboy. Interesting how you always manage to
turn ever thread into a kind of personal interrogation, isn't it. It must be a gift you
have.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie mmm, dunno, cant remember. Ask proper knob, he remembers everything.
So you don't subscribe to the view that to be "overtly critical" is "hate speech"? You mentioned that definition a page or two ago. But it's not a definition of "hate speech" that you personally subscribe to, is that right?
Originally posted by FMF So you don't subscribe to the view that to be "overtly critical" is "hate speech"? You mentioned that definition a page or two ago. But it's not a definition of "hate speech" that you personally subscribe to, is that right?
reread the text, i have stated what i stated, you interpret it how you like. Its dinner
time for me and i am hungry.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie reread the text, i have stated what i stated, you interpret it how you like. Its dinner
time for me and i am hungry.
You mentioned that someone else had said that being "overtly critical" is "hate speech". But you did not state whether you agreed. Do you or don't you think that being "overtly critical" is "hate speech"?
Originally posted by robbie carrobie mmm, dunno, cant remember. Ask proper knob, he remembers everything. I got
banned recently for calling someone fatboy. Interesting how you always manage to
turn ever thread into a kind of personal interrogation, isn't it. It must be a gift you
have.
I am trying to understand your definition of "hate speech". You spent pages and pages of this thread seemingly avoiding calling Dasa's deleted OP "hate speech" or, perhaps you were just pretending not to have been aware of it, and yet here you are now on whatever page we're on, seemingly proposing that "hate speech" covers criticism and disagreement and lame epithets.
On page 1 of this thread you said [Dasa] merely sought to bring terrible acts of persecution to the forums attention, and yet - even by your own definition - the central point of his deleted OP was "hate speech". Perhaps it would be fair to say that you were being somewhat disingenuous on the first few pages of this thread.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie It seeks to vilify God as having the same characteristics as the leader of the National
socialists, in Germany, in the 1930's. I object to the term, sexual orientation, it has no
basis in empirical science and is misleading, sexual preference should be used. Woden
was a pagan God who had human characteristics, you cannot say the same of the
Biblical God.
Whether God exists or not is a matter of faith, that cannot be said for the other groups on that definition. If God is offended by this so called case of 'hate speech', why don't you tell him to come down and put his views on the forum so we can read them.
Originally posted by Proper Knob Whether God exists or not is a matter of faith, that cannot be said for the other groups on that definition. If God is offended by this so called case of 'hate speech', why don't you tell him to come down and put his views on the forum so we can read them.
From all appearances, hate speech against God is a victimless crime.
Originally posted by JS357 I don't quite understand robbie;s take on this. But I will defer to him on this little subthread, to see it it has traction.
Originally posted by JS357 From all appearances, hate speech against God is a victimless crime.
I disagree! There are no real Atheists. Those who claim to be Atheists are just running from God because they hate him. Therefore, anything they say about him is Hate Speech and should be removed. The actual intent of the 'hater' is irrelevant - we should go exclusively by how offended I am.
What happened to the Dasa thread?
23 Oct '12 16:12
Back to Top