^It's a hate crime: the offender's name and deed should be published and he/she should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law...the equivalent, I imagine, of throwing a pig's head into a mosque or having D. Trump lecture children on ethics...
There's no such thing as a "hate crime", this is evil Orwellian shit designed to social engineer the world to fit a vile left-wing fascist agenda, to make people afraid to say, think, or feel, what they want, when they want, how they want, and where they want... "thought crime" is next. Crush their identity; crush their self-expression. Disgusting.
Anyone who thinks it's somehow reasonable knows fock all about ethics and is a focking moron...
yes, we understand that all though all religions are made up fairy stories, that realpolitik is that some things are touchy subjects, but actually they shouldn't be, and the status quo should be challenged. education tends to be the antidote to religions of the overt and concealed kind, and education only really works where there is free expression to fully test ideas without them being suffocated and constrained by politics, which is the enemy of education really.
this ideology of "hate crime" and diversity daleks is the epitome of a concealed religion, a form f politics that is undermining education... it oozes from some hideous festering pus-ridden gulag in hell, some primitive knuckledragging Salem-witch-trial-esque benighted pisspool of attention-seeking self-loathing and puritanical buckle-hatted fist-wringing bigotry.
There should NEVER be laws about expression of thought, feeling, or opinin and NEVER be any punishment for saying anything, with the exception of defamation.
The only offences here are a minor bit of damage to property, and someone being a nob, but embarrassing them should be sufficient... anything beyond that is surely obscenely disproportionate.
That shit is for the sort of twisted shitstains that want to live in a world like that of ISIS or the DPRK - fock them all to hell. These laws need repealing urgently. If not then statements like this could never be made!
What ever happened to "so what?!"?!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceS_jkKjIgo
Last edited by CaptainNemo; 10-10-2017 at 02:40 PM.
of course there is...
exactly: words have consequences...folks don't live on individual islands but in societies where constraints are necessary...
unfortunate generalization
you and your pocket mouse then
nonsense
disagree: some "thoughts, feelings or opinions" should be kept to oneself out of consideration for others...social living requires it.
disagree: you're not going after other folks here...you're suggesting what laws should or shouldn't exist: entirely different notion...
Majestically enthroned amid the vulgar herd
The Quran is full of hate speech, it hates unbelievers, gays, women and Jews of course. The haddith of Bukhari, the full version not edited one, reveals Mohamad as a dirty bastard who shit and pissed in the street, who did not always wash before praying and who got his child bride to wash the sperm off his clothes as he went round his 11 wives in a day to fuck them all, having nothing better to do as a 'prophet' of God!
Not that old chestnut again, the old testament is irrelevant and does not have 109 verses advocating violence and if it did nobody would be acting on them. Muslims take the filth in the Quran seriously and especially the life of the prophet who said- 'I have been mad victorious by terror' not by turning the other cheek, or loving thy neighbor or by rendering unto ceasar that which was ceasars, but by terror, killing.
Good post by the Nemo!
TC you are overusing ellipsis. It is supposed to convey something unsaid, as if the reader should ponder the words. But if you overuse it or use it where it plainly does not work, as above, you wear it out.
You will end up like jeff if you are not careful...
That bizarre bit of blind ranting revisionism would actually be comical if not for the sobering fact that people die because of hate crimes.Originally Posted by CaptainNemo
^Agree it is not actually true that people are, or should be, free to say whatever they like.
The justifiable sensibilities of other people should be part of the calculus of free speech.
But judging what sensibility is justifiable and what is snowflake-esque is the difficult part.
sure, like in the case of a gay kid being dragged to his death behind a pickup truck.
Though, this guy should have been fined for damaging the arm rest, IMO, and not for insulting allah or headscarves or offending the Muslim passenger with what he wrote on the note.
what would he have been charged with if he had written "go to hell" because he wasn't happy about the service and the Muslim passenger spaying perfume near his face?
Could he be charged with "passive aggressive behavior towards a fellow passenger on a plane"?
Heck, if passive aggressive insults are illegal, then ant, Cyrille and bsnub could be charged with a crime for what they post on td every day.
Just need to find a "hate crime" angle.
![]()
It's still just passive aggressive aggressive behavior whether he wrote "go to hell" "fuck off" or "fuck off with wearing headscarves in the U.K."
That's not what 'passive aggressive' means.
Nope, he dropped it between two passengers and clearly intended for one or both of them to read it.
The act wasn't passive-aggressive and neither was whatever he wrote because it was clearly outright abuse.
it was likely tame compared to the insults you, bsnub and cyrille write everyday.
Is what you guys write not "outright abuse" just because your targets and insults aren't targeting muslims?
so, ant let's say you're on a plane next to some Christian trump supporters and after listening to them praise trump for appointing conservatives to the Supreme Court to support Christian causes
as the plane lands, you drop a note on the ground for them: Fuck Jesus, fuck you Christian trump supporters and the rest of you kkk cunts".
the plane lands and ant is arrested and thinks to himself: fair enough, I deserve to be in handcuffs for what I wrote.
Completely, utterly, pointlessly irrelevant.Originally Posted by Farangrakthai
The discussion was what constitutes 'passive-aggressive', specifically your misuse of it.
You've not so much moved the posts as you have uprooted them and shipped them to a foreign country.
No, let's not say that.Originally Posted by Farangrakthai
Because that's fucking dumb and I'd never do that.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)