Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 81 to 89 of 89

Thread: A Hate Church Makes a Case for Free Speech

  1. #81
    Irremovable Intelligence
    Removable Mind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    25,652

    Re: A Hate Church Makes a Case for Free Speech

    Quote Originally Posted by HowardBThiname View Post
    Once again -- this is obviously over your head and I'm not interested in engaging you.



    The "honest, educated, objective posters" disagree with you.

    If you ever manage to get that chip off your shoulder, come back and try again. More folks would be likely to give you a chance. As it is -- it's simply not worth it.
    Indeed, way over people’s head who disagrees with you.

    You’re right, why would anyone negate your arguments? The world should revolve around your opinions and beliefs. Very few people, like yourself, are capable of grasping such complex issues like hate crimes and freedom of speech issues like you.

    By the way, did you happen to read my post #60? It was actually a reply to you and AO’s Post #53 and #59.

    From one of your previous post, I’d like to point out....

    There is a difference between deaths or being harmed (hitting someone in the head with a instrument of some kind) resulting from one having immutable characteristics that others hate - versus having what is opined by a bigot to be an offended by a hairstyle.

    A person who is considered by a bigot to have an offensive or bad hairstyle can be coerce by the bigot into changing it to avoid harm or death. At least that offers a person with an offensive hairstyle a choice as to whether or not they want to be harmed or even killed. Say a person of color, who is hated solely for their skin color, isn’t capable of possibly saving themselves from being harmed or killed, regardless.

  2. #82
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    45,336

    Re: A Hate Church Makes a Case for Free Speech

    1A. They can believe that crap if they want. Same as the Identity and KKK bunch.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  3. #83
    Sage
    vesper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,558

    Re: A Hate Church Makes a Case for Free Speech

    By SPLC's own standards can be identified as a hate group.

  4. #84
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    50,720

    Re: A Hate Church Makes a Case for Free Speech

    Quote Originally Posted by vesper View Post
    By SPLC's own standards can be identified as a hate group.
    You mean by YOUR opinions and feelings of their standards LOL
    Quote Originally Posted by vegas giants View Post
    Physical abuse is hitting kids
    Quote Originally Posted by MateoMtnClimber View Post
    Yes, gay people absolutely have the right to infringe on other people's religious rights. See the entire civil rights movement.
    Quote Originally Posted by RamFel View Post
    Genetically human & human being is exactly the same thing.

  5. #85
    Sage
    vesper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,558

    Re: A Hate Church Makes a Case for Free Speech

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    You mean by YOUR opinions and feelings of their standards LOL
    No I mean exactly what I said. By their own standards they do not pass the smell test.

  6. #86
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    50,720

    Re: A Hate Church Makes a Case for Free Speech

    Quote Originally Posted by vesper View Post
    No I mean exactly what I said. By their own standards they do not pass the smell test.
    Once again based on your feelings and opinions of their standards
    Quote Originally Posted by vegas giants View Post
    Physical abuse is hitting kids
    Quote Originally Posted by MateoMtnClimber View Post
    Yes, gay people absolutely have the right to infringe on other people's religious rights. See the entire civil rights movement.
    Quote Originally Posted by RamFel View Post
    Genetically human & human being is exactly the same thing.

  7. #87
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    America's Heartland
    Last Seen
    09-16-18 @ 05:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    10,573

    Re: A Hate Church Makes a Case for Free Speech

    Quote Originally Posted by Removable Mind View Post
    Indeed, way over people’s head who disagrees with you.

    You’re right, why would anyone negate your arguments? The world should revolve around your opinions and beliefs. Very few people, like yourself, are capable of grasping such complex issues like hate crimes and freedom of speech issues like you.

    By the way, did you happen to read my post #60? It was actually a reply to you and AO’s Post #53 and #59.

    From one of your previous post, I’d like to point out....

    There is a difference between deaths or being harmed (hitting someone in the head with a instrument of some kind) resulting from one having immutable characteristics that others hate - versus having what is opined by a bigot to be an offended by a hairstyle.

    A person who is considered by a bigot to have an offensive or bad hairstyle can be coerce by the bigot into changing it to avoid harm or death. At least that offers a person with an offensive hairstyle a choice as to whether or not they want to be harmed or even killed. Say a person of color, who is hated solely for their skin color, isn’t capable of possibly saving themselves from being harmed or killed, regardless.
    Grow thicker skin.

    You're on the wrong side of the old childhood saying, "Sticks and stones will break my bones but names can never hurt me."

    Millions of mothers have imparted wisdom to snowflake children with those words. And, they're still true today.

    The First Amendment protects the words of those we find repulsive due to their beliefs. The SPLC is circumventing the Constitution in order to label groups with which they disagree.

    I never stated the SPLC didn't have the "right" to do that. I simply asked if they were infringing on the free speech of others (through social shaming) with their labels. The Church in the OP appears to think that's what's happening to them.

    We've had some good thoughtful posts on the topic (including yours), and then we've had some flighty, non-thinking posts. That's the way most threads go so it's not surprising, but in order to maintain the topic, I'm not addressing the posters who simply want to throw mud.

  8. #88
    Professor

    NotreDame's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    6 hours south of the Golden Dome of Notre Dame
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,955

    A Hate Church Makes a Case for Free Speech

    Quote Originally Posted by HowardBThiname View Post
    It's more the way in which the "societal consequences" are dealt with that is at issue here.

    We all have the right to call out any behavior or talk we see that we don't like. But, when we support a system, albeit in this case a private one (SPLC), that labels a group as being a "hate group" we are buying into that system of "shaming" in an attempt to socially engineer thought.

    A couple of months ago, another church filed suit against the SPLC for giving them a "hate" designation because the Church teaches that homosexuality is wrong, and the base their teachings on bible scriptures. You can see that case here:
    Southern Poverty Law Center hate group LGBT lawsuit: Coral Ridge Christian ministry sues | The Kansas City Star

    Is it hateful for a church to say that homosexuality is wrong? If we, as a society, are to believe that, are we not shaming that church into silence? And, if we do that, are we not guilty of censoring their right to speak to their beliefs?

    The SPLC is creating an atmosphere whereby citizens are taking their "ratings" as truth without thinking about the ramifications for free speech.

    Consider the case of Floyd Corkins, who, based on SPLC's label of the Family Research Council as a anti-gay hate group, decided to kill as many of them as possible.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.813f207dc2fe

    Now, any crazy can pick up a gun, and obviously Corkins was crazy, but the SPLC is wielding great power here, and should our 1st Amendment grant them more freedom of speech than the groups they label receive?

    The fact is -- we cannot (as a society) punish thoughts. We can, however, punish deeds.



    AlbqOwl nailed it on this one.
    Your argument is as follows:

    SLPC designates groups as a “hate group.” Some entities and people will review SLPC designations to determine whether to provide money or associate in a formal or professional capacity with the group. Such a designation has resulted in some entities, for sure one, to lose funding of some kind. This has the effect of infringing upon free speech as groups will modify their speech to avoid the undesirous consequences of the label “hate” group. In other words, there is a “shaming” of these groups and this has the potential to chill speech.

    A component of free speech of course includes the liberty to use labels to describe and characterize things, objects, people, groups, etcetera. This is especially true in regards to matters of pure opinion. Excluding defamation and other forms of speech exceptions under the law, speech in the form of opinion should be protected. Whether some entity is a “hate” group because of its views is purely subjective, it is an opinion as opposed to a statement asserting facts that could harm a reputation. So, for example, falsely claiming someone to be a member of the KKK is an assertion of fact that is more amenable to validate or falsify.

    But labeling some group as a hate group is mere opinion, as there isn’t any objective facts unequivocally demonstrating whether some group is a “hate” group. Pure opinion should be permitted. If some group dislikes the opinion of another, such as a label, then the proper remedy is for the group to respond with speech denouncing the label, its use, applicability, and publicly deride those using the label, as opposed to seeking to take away free speech of others to give a pure opinion.

    As you’ve acknowledged, there may be societal consequences for speech. One such consequence is the use of labels in a pure opinion manner. Labels such as the speech was racist, sexist, unpatriotic, ant-American, anti-religion, hate speech, and I’d include the labels they’re commies, they’re fascists, they are a of “hate” group, is an inherent part of a society valuing free speech. Free speech undoubtedly permits the use of labels to demonize the opposing point of view and those expressing the message. Those are the unavoidable consequences of free speech, the use of labels to demonize the message and messenger.

    And the “social engineering” argument is to unpersuasive quite simply because social engineering is an inherent quality of society, and speech is indispensable to it. Indeed, your own opinion is part of “social engineering” as you express a vision of what should occur in society and in expressing your views, hope to so influence others and society.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by NotreDame; 10-18-17 at 01:52 PM.
    "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." James Madison, Father of the U.S. Constitution and 4th president of the United States.

  9. #89
    Student
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Last Seen
    08-02-18 @ 04:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    207

    Re: A Hate Church Makes a Case for Free Speech

    Quote Originally Posted by HowardBThiname View Post
    My concern is that by designating individual groups as "hate groups," we're effectively creating an atmosphere that restricts their free speech.

    The question is not so much whether these various groups/churches have the right to free speech -- we know they do -- it's whether being designated a hate group has the effect of infringing on that right.

    Is the "hate" label a form of social engineering designed to make society put pressure on specific groups to silence them?

    This is an especially interesting case, because not only is this church racist in nature, it's also a religion, so it comes under another protective constitutional classification.
    I've thought about this question extensively, and any attitude that the label "hate" creates, is very much the option of the perceiver to accept it is hate, or reject it as hate.

    Of course it is social engineering, and in a social environment where the constitutional PURPOSE as allowed by the 9th Amendment is NOT defined, such social engineering is to be expected as a default. Or, if the opposite is not defined, then the extreme can be effectively defined.

    When the ultimate constitutional PURPOSE of free speech is defined, then Americans will automatically know that such speech now labeled "hate" is really the opposite of constitutional.

    My thread here;

    https://www.debatepolitics.com/us-co...h-9th-amd.html (The Ultimate Purpose Of The Right To Free Speech - Re-established through the 9th AMD.)

    Is about this and for creating an understanding of HOW the living document, lives through us and our need of its service to fix, generation and after generation, principles that are indeed timeless and always serving humanity, and firstly that humanity that lives under its natural law doctrines as they respect all humanity.

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •