Officer probably played football at some point in life. Nice form.boognish_bear said:
Pretty good form… Tackled through the manGeorgia state troopers are not messing around.
— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) April 26, 2024
Officer spear tackles a protester at Emory University in Atlanta. pic.twitter.com/HXtjWuHD5b
Campus Protests
44,725 Views |
1107 Replies |
Last: 1 day ago by nein51
So North Korea finally got Internet for the Party Faithful, hmm?ron.reagan said:I'll have to take your word for it, I don't get to your country oftenRedbrickbear said:ron.reagan said:I have the right to call you a mouth breather.D. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:This literally has nothing to do with rights you mouth breather, lmaoD. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:Maybe in communist Russia you have rights to do what you want on private property, but not in the US.Redbrickbear said:D. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:I think a rational argument would be the KKK has 0 good people and these protestors have at least some good people although sightly confusedShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
That's not a rational argument.
It is in ron's trotskyite world view.
"good people" have rights..."bad people" don't
If anyone has a right to protest, then everyone has a right to protest, or no one has a right to protest.
In this country, it does. You have the right insult me by calling me a mouth breather and I have the right to tell you that whether a group has "good people" or "bad people" or "slightly confused people" is unrelated to the protection provided to their speech by the First Amendment. The First Amendment is not designed to protect non offensive speech.
Much of the property we are talking about is not private property. A public university, unlike a private university, has to meet certain First Amendment standards and whether there are "good people" in a group is not one of those standard. You have not offered a rational argument.
You calling anyone a mouth breather is rich Mr. Trotsky
Or are you posting from Venezuela again, ron?
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Forest Bueller_bf said:Officer probably played football at some point in life. Nice form.boognish_bear said:
Pretty good form… Tackled through the manGeorgia state troopers are not messing around.
— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) April 26, 2024
Officer spear tackles a protester at Emory University in Atlanta. pic.twitter.com/HXtjWuHD5b
Eligibility left? We need LBs
You keep saying that speech shouldn't be criminalized due to content, yet the very fact is if the content of speech is a violent threat, then it IS and should be criminalized. You even agreed to this, so you're also contradicting yourself!Frank Galvin said:No, I am not. I have spend inordinate amount of time explaining to you the constitutional parameters. I did it by showing you the Supreme Court opinion that controls and the actual language of the relevant statutes. I did it by demonstrating I am qualified to have an informed opinion about how those things fit together.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Not unless their "crazy s__t" is violently threatening others. You are oddly having a lot of difficulty understanding this very simple concept.Frank Galvin said:If you don't want people to arrest you for misgendering someone you have to vigorously defend their right to spout crazy s___t..Wangchung said:They like the freedom to threaten but when they are threatened in return it's the end of the world. Hell, imagine telling one of the protestors you have the freedom to misgender them. Woooo boy, that becomes a public mental breakdown.Frank Galvin said:Because they like freedom?BusyTarpDuster2017 said:I don't understand why people have difficulty grasping this.ShooterTX said:Frank Galvin said:ShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
There is a difference between not hosting a speaker and putting a speaker in jail based on the content of their speech. Not speaking for anyone else but my point has been remarkably simple.
We should not be arresting people for the content of what they say. Trespass, obstruction, disorderly, assault, etc. I have no problem with.
Even more remarkable is the number of alleged conservatives who disagree and think the content of the speech (ie anti-semitism) alone justifies criminal penalty.
Their speech is a call to violence.
"Death to America" is both a call to violence and a terroristic threat.
If 10 people surrounded you on the street and chanted "Death to Frank Galvin"... you KNOW that it would be a call to violence and a terroristic threat... or would you need to wait until they violently attacked you?
"From the river to the sea" is another call to violence and a terroristic threat. We have already seen examples of these groups attacking Jewish people, which just proves that their speech is a call to violence against Jewish Americans.
If none of this is accurate, then why are all of these universities telling Jewish students that they cannot protect them? Why are these schools shutting down classes and graduation ceremonies? Obviously, these Hamas lovers are a terroristic & violent threat to normal people... otherwise there would be no need to shut down the campus.
Again, this is no different than banning the KKK from a campus... except they are calling for violence against ALL Americans, not just Black Americans.
I have made clear that acts outside of speech should be prosecuted; that my issue is only with those who would criminalize speech based solely on the content fo that speech.
All of your typing boils down to this: "It can't be that way." You have given nothing in support other than your own opinion. You are free to have that opinion and spout it-because we have and and we vigorously protect the First Amendment. I think you miss the irony.
We are not getting anywhere so I am going to quit conversing with you on this topic. I leave it at this with you. If you want a free country it has to be free for those you disagree with also.
What is the matter with you, how are you not understanding this? It's even worse if you really are a lawyer!
ron.reagan said:Thankfully the Supreme court already established the framework to do thatRedbrickbear said:ron.reagan said:That is a odd way to say I'm still here, but yeahRedbrickbear said:ron.reagan said:I'd rather not encourage you to continueD. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:I have the right to call you a mouth breather. Everything else you said is incorrect.D. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:This literally has nothing to do with rights you mouth breather, lmaoD. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:Maybe in communist Russia you have rights to do what you want on private property, but not in the US.Redbrickbear said:D. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:I think a rational argument would be the KKK has 0 good people and these protestors have at least some good people although sightly confusedShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
That's not a rational argument.
It is in ron's trotskyite world view.
"good people" have rights..."bad people" don't
If anyone has a right to protest, then everyone has a right to protest, or no one has a right to protest.
In this country, it does. You have the right insult me by calling me a mouth breather and I have the right to tell you that whether a group has "good people" or "bad people" or "slightly confused people" is unrelated to the protection provided to their speech by the First Amendment. The First Amendment is not designed to protect non offensive speech.
Much of the property we are talking about is not private property. A public university, unlike a private university, has to meet certain First Amendment standards and whether there are "good people" in a group is not one of those standard. You have not offered a rational argument.
You are unable to demonstrate that anything I have said above is incorrect and for me to continue in this argument would be kind of like beating up a cripple. While I would have a right to do so, I am not sure it is the most ethical choice to embarrass you more than you have already embarrassed yourself.
You are just unable to prove that anything he said is incorrect...and now you're running away like a baby
We are still waiting for you to prove him incorrect...
I am basically repeating the Supreme Court's framework for First Amendment cases. Government may limit free speech but it has to meet a variety of pretty stringent tests, none of which include the question of whether some of the speakers are confused.
GTFO!
Jack Bauer said:
GTFO!
At least they are not tearing down our historic statues like during BLM
Frank Galvin said:You are really, really missing the point. The reason you protect free speeech at the margins is so that it doesn't get to Galileo.ShooterTX said:Frank Galvin said:We certainly can and have. Being enthusiastic about the should is terrifying. They arrested Galileo for the heresy that the sun, rather than the earth, was the center of the solar system.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:We can, have, and should arrest people for what they say. I don't know why this is even a debate or controversial.Frank Galvin said:ShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
There is a difference between not hosting a speaker and putting a speaker in jail based on the content of their speech. Not speaking for anyone else but my point has been remarkably simple.
We should not be arresting people for the content of what they say. Trespass, obstruction, disorderly, assault, etc. I have no problem with.
Even more remarkable is the number of alleged conservatives who disagree and think the content of the speech (ie anti-semitism) alone justifies criminal penalty.
Apples & Oranges... big time!
How many times did Galileo call for "Death to the Earthers"? How many times did he call for a genocide against his opponents?
Free speech is for people like Galileo... who engage in debate, conversation and discussion. It is not for people like Osama Bin Laden or these terrorists on our campuses. These are not people who are calling for a debate... they are terrorists who are making demands or else they will make good on their threats of violence & genocide. How you cannot see the difference is remarkable.
And apples and oranges is pretty well described by comparing Osama Bin Laden to a misguided sophomre who would rather chant than study.
That would be true if the student were not chanting the exact words of Osama Bin Laden.
ShooterTX
ron.reagan said:If you don't understand how good people can't be in the KKK there isn't a lot of common ground here.ShooterTX said:Those are pretty remarkable assumptions on both sides.ron.reagan said:I think a rational argument would be the KKK has 0 good people and these protestors have at least some good people although sightly confusedShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
How do you know that the KKK doesn't have good people who are slightly confused?
How many good people do you know, who chant "Death to America"? Do good people wish death upon an entire nation of people?
Even if there were good people within either of these groups... who cares? Does their confusion mean that we should allow & support the evil that they are supporting? Both the KKK and Hamas are evil, terroristic organizations who want to (and have) murdered innocent people because of their ethnicity. Can you honestly justify some confused persons actions, when they support these terroristic murderers?
Or is it that you just hate America and the Jews... and don't want to admit it to yourself or anyone else?
I never said that there are good people in the KKK. I simply pointed out how stupid it is to claim one group is completely devoid of anyone good, while you make exceptions for the other group.
Clearly, you just hate Jews and Americans. Why can't you just admit it?
ShooterTX
I'm not surprised you don't realize how active North Korea is on the internet and has been for decadesOldbear83 said:So North Korea finally got Internet for the Party Faithful, hmm?ron.reagan said:I'll have to take your word for it, I don't get to your country oftenRedbrickbear said:ron.reagan said:I have the right to call you a mouth breather.D. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:This literally has nothing to do with rights you mouth breather, lmaoD. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:Maybe in communist Russia you have rights to do what you want on private property, but not in the US.Redbrickbear said:D. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:I think a rational argument would be the KKK has 0 good people and these protestors have at least some good people although sightly confusedShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
That's not a rational argument.
It is in ron's trotskyite world view.
"good people" have rights..."bad people" don't
If anyone has a right to protest, then everyone has a right to protest, or no one has a right to protest.
In this country, it does. You have the right insult me by calling me a mouth breather and I have the right to tell you that whether a group has "good people" or "bad people" or "slightly confused people" is unrelated to the protection provided to their speech by the First Amendment. The First Amendment is not designed to protect non offensive speech.
Much of the property we are talking about is not private property. A public university, unlike a private university, has to meet certain First Amendment standards and whether there are "good people" in a group is not one of those standard. You have not offered a rational argument.
You calling anyone a mouth breather is rich Mr. Trotsky
Or are you posting from Venezuela again, ron?
Do you think any of the protestors are good people?ShooterTX said:ron.reagan said:If you don't understand how good people can't be in the KKK there isn't a lot of common ground here.ShooterTX said:Those are pretty remarkable assumptions on both sides.ron.reagan said:I think a rational argument would be the KKK has 0 good people and these protestors have at least some good people although sightly confusedShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
How do you know that the KKK doesn't have good people who are slightly confused?
How many good people do you know, who chant "Death to America"? Do good people wish death upon an entire nation of people?
Even if there were good people within either of these groups... who cares? Does their confusion mean that we should allow & support the evil that they are supporting? Both the KKK and Hamas are evil, terroristic organizations who want to (and have) murdered innocent people because of their ethnicity. Can you honestly justify some confused persons actions, when they support these terroristic murderers?
Or is it that you just hate America and the Jews... and don't want to admit it to yourself or anyone else?
I never said that there are good people in the KKK. I simply pointed out how stupid it is to claim one group is completely devoid of anyone good, while you make exceptions for the other group.
Clearly, you just hate Jews and Americans. Why can't you just admit it?
I just presumed you weren't part of the NK Hacking Team. Sorry, you must be so proud to represent Kim (Little Biden) Jong-Un at SE365.ron.reagan said:I'm not surprised you don't realize how active North Korea is on the internet and has been for decadesOldbear83 said:So North Korea finally got Internet for the Party Faithful, hmm?ron.reagan said:I'll have to take your word for it, I don't get to your country oftenRedbrickbear said:ron.reagan said:I have the right to call you a mouth breather.D. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:This literally has nothing to do with rights you mouth breather, lmaoD. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:Maybe in communist Russia you have rights to do what you want on private property, but not in the US.Redbrickbear said:D. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:I think a rational argument would be the KKK has 0 good people and these protestors have at least some good people although sightly confusedShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
That's not a rational argument.
It is in ron's trotskyite world view.
"good people" have rights..."bad people" don't
If anyone has a right to protest, then everyone has a right to protest, or no one has a right to protest.
In this country, it does. You have the right insult me by calling me a mouth breather and I have the right to tell you that whether a group has "good people" or "bad people" or "slightly confused people" is unrelated to the protection provided to their speech by the First Amendment. The First Amendment is not designed to protect non offensive speech.
Much of the property we are talking about is not private property. A public university, unlike a private university, has to meet certain First Amendment standards and whether there are "good people" in a group is not one of those standard. You have not offered a rational argument.
You calling anyone a mouth breather is rich Mr. Trotsky
Or are you posting from Venezuela again, ron?
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Great postOldbear83 said:I just presumed you weren't part of the NK Hacking Team. Sorry, you must be so proud to represent Kim (Little Biden) Jong-Un at SE365.ron.reagan said:I'm not surprised you don't realize how active North Korea is on the internet and has been for decadesOldbear83 said:So North Korea finally got Internet for the Party Faithful, hmm?ron.reagan said:I'll have to take your word for it, I don't get to your country oftenRedbrickbear said:ron.reagan said:I have the right to call you a mouth breather.D. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:This literally has nothing to do with rights you mouth breather, lmaoD. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:Maybe in communist Russia you have rights to do what you want on private property, but not in the US.Redbrickbear said:D. C. Bear said:ron.reagan said:I think a rational argument would be the KKK has 0 good people and these protestors have at least some good people although sightly confusedShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
That's not a rational argument.
It is in ron's trotskyite world view.
"good people" have rights..."bad people" don't
If anyone has a right to protest, then everyone has a right to protest, or no one has a right to protest.
In this country, it does. You have the right insult me by calling me a mouth breather and I have the right to tell you that whether a group has "good people" or "bad people" or "slightly confused people" is unrelated to the protection provided to their speech by the First Amendment. The First Amendment is not designed to protect non offensive speech.
Much of the property we are talking about is not private property. A public university, unlike a private university, has to meet certain First Amendment standards and whether there are "good people" in a group is not one of those standard. You have not offered a rational argument.
You calling anyone a mouth breather is rich Mr. Trotsky
Or are you posting from Venezuela again, ron?
...not yet.Redbrickbear said:Jack Bauer said:
GTFO!
At least they are not tearing down our historic statues like during BLM
I don't care if they are "good people" or not... they are advocating for evil. They are calling for genocide and violence against our nation... that is all that really matters in this situation.ron.reagan said:Do you think any of the protestors are good people?ShooterTX said:ron.reagan said:If you don't understand how good people can't be in the KKK there isn't a lot of common ground here.ShooterTX said:Those are pretty remarkable assumptions on both sides.ron.reagan said:I think a rational argument would be the KKK has 0 good people and these protestors have at least some good people although sightly confusedShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
How do you know that the KKK doesn't have good people who are slightly confused?
How many good people do you know, who chant "Death to America"? Do good people wish death upon an entire nation of people?
Even if there were good people within either of these groups... who cares? Does their confusion mean that we should allow & support the evil that they are supporting? Both the KKK and Hamas are evil, terroristic organizations who want to (and have) murdered innocent people because of their ethnicity. Can you honestly justify some confused persons actions, when they support these terroristic murderers?
Or is it that you just hate America and the Jews... and don't want to admit it to yourself or anyone else?
I never said that there are good people in the KKK. I simply pointed out how stupid it is to claim one group is completely devoid of anyone good, while you make exceptions for the other group.
Clearly, you just hate Jews and Americans. Why can't you just admit it?
ShooterTX
ShooterTX said:Frank Galvin said:You are really, really missing the point. The reason you protect free speeech at the margins is so that it doesn't get to Galileo.ShooterTX said:Frank Galvin said:We certainly can and have. Being enthusiastic about the should is terrifying. They arrested Galileo for the heresy that the sun, rather than the earth, was the center of the solar system.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:We can, have, and should arrest people for what they say. I don't know why this is even a debate or controversial.Frank Galvin said:ShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
There is a difference between not hosting a speaker and putting a speaker in jail based on the content of their speech. Not speaking for anyone else but my point has been remarkably simple.
We should not be arresting people for the content of what they say. Trespass, obstruction, disorderly, assault, etc. I have no problem with.
Even more remarkable is the number of alleged conservatives who disagree and think the content of the speech (ie anti-semitism) alone justifies criminal penalty.
Apples & Oranges... big time!
How many times did Galileo call for "Death to the Earthers"? How many times did he call for a genocide against his opponents?
Free speech is for people like Galileo... who engage in debate, conversation and discussion. It is not for people like Osama Bin Laden or these terrorists on our campuses. These are not people who are calling for a debate... they are terrorists who are making demands or else they will make good on their threats of violence & genocide. How you cannot see the difference is remarkable.
And apples and oranges is pretty well described by comparing Osama Bin Laden to a misguided sophomre who would rather chant than study.
That would be true if the student were not chanting the exact words of Osama Bin Laden.
And millions of others who never did a thing to us.
There was a guy a couple of streets over from me who flew a F Biden flag for about a year after the election. Should we have arrested him for inciting people to rape the President?
Do you think any of the protestors are good people?ShooterTX said:I don't care if they are "good people" or not... they are advocating for evil. They are calling for genocide and violence against our nation... that is all that really matters in this situation.ron.reagan said:Do you think any of the protestors are good people?ShooterTX said:ron.reagan said:If you don't understand how good people can't be in the KKK there isn't a lot of common ground here.ShooterTX said:Those are pretty remarkable assumptions on both sides.ron.reagan said:I think a rational argument would be the KKK has 0 good people and these protestors have at least some good people although sightly confusedShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
How do you know that the KKK doesn't have good people who are slightly confused?
How many good people do you know, who chant "Death to America"? Do good people wish death upon an entire nation of people?
Even if there were good people within either of these groups... who cares? Does their confusion mean that we should allow & support the evil that they are supporting? Both the KKK and Hamas are evil, terroristic organizations who want to (and have) murdered innocent people because of their ethnicity. Can you honestly justify some confused persons actions, when they support these terroristic murderers?
Or is it that you just hate America and the Jews... and don't want to admit it to yourself or anyone else?
I never said that there are good people in the KKK. I simply pointed out how stupid it is to claim one group is completely devoid of anyone good, while you make exceptions for the other group.
Clearly, you just hate Jews and Americans. Why can't you just admit it?
No. If your protest causes another person to alter his or her day, you are by definition, selfish and, as such, not a good person.ron.reagan said:Do you think any of the protestors are good people?ShooterTX said:I don't care if they are "good people" or not... they are advocating for evil. They are calling for genocide and violence against our nation... that is all that really matters in this situation.ron.reagan said:Do you think any of the protestors are good people?ShooterTX said:ron.reagan said:If you don't understand how good people can't be in the KKK there isn't a lot of common ground here.ShooterTX said:Those are pretty remarkable assumptions on both sides.ron.reagan said:I think a rational argument would be the KKK has 0 good people and these protestors have at least some good people although sightly confusedShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
How do you know that the KKK doesn't have good people who are slightly confused?
How many good people do you know, who chant "Death to America"? Do good people wish death upon an entire nation of people?
Even if there were good people within either of these groups... who cares? Does their confusion mean that we should allow & support the evil that they are supporting? Both the KKK and Hamas are evil, terroristic organizations who want to (and have) murdered innocent people because of their ethnicity. Can you honestly justify some confused persons actions, when they support these terroristic murderers?
Or is it that you just hate America and the Jews... and don't want to admit it to yourself or anyone else?
I never said that there are good people in the KKK. I simply pointed out how stupid it is to claim one group is completely devoid of anyone good, while you make exceptions for the other group.
Clearly, you just hate Jews and Americans. Why can't you just admit it?
Want to protest, get a permit, schedule the event, and disperse when it is over. Otherwise, you are not a good person.
So protests disrupt peoples days and this is bad.GrowlTowel said:No. If your protest causes another person to alter his or her day, you are by definition, selfish and, as such, not a good person.ron.reagan said:Do you think any of the protestors are good people?ShooterTX said:I don't care if they are "good people" or not... they are advocating for evil. They are calling for genocide and violence against our nation... that is all that really matters in this situation.ron.reagan said:Do you think any of the protestors are good people?ShooterTX said:ron.reagan said:If you don't understand how good people can't be in the KKK there isn't a lot of common ground here.ShooterTX said:Those are pretty remarkable assumptions on both sides.ron.reagan said:I think a rational argument would be the KKK has 0 good people and these protestors have at least some good people although sightly confusedShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
How do you know that the KKK doesn't have good people who are slightly confused?
How many good people do you know, who chant "Death to America"? Do good people wish death upon an entire nation of people?
Even if there were good people within either of these groups... who cares? Does their confusion mean that we should allow & support the evil that they are supporting? Both the KKK and Hamas are evil, terroristic organizations who want to (and have) murdered innocent people because of their ethnicity. Can you honestly justify some confused persons actions, when they support these terroristic murderers?
Or is it that you just hate America and the Jews... and don't want to admit it to yourself or anyone else?
I never said that there are good people in the KKK. I simply pointed out how stupid it is to claim one group is completely devoid of anyone good, while you make exceptions for the other group.
Clearly, you just hate Jews and Americans. Why can't you just admit it?
Want to protest, get a permit, schedule the event, and disperse when it is over. Otherwise, you are not a good person.
Getting a permit magically doesn't disrupt any ones day.
Got it.
Read all the words together and try again. Got it?ron.reagan said:So protests disrupt peoples days and this is bad.GrowlTowel said:No. If your protest causes another person to alter his or her day, you are by definition, selfish and, as such, not a good person.ron.reagan said:Do you think any of the protestors are good people?ShooterTX said:I don't care if they are "good people" or not... they are advocating for evil. They are calling for genocide and violence against our nation... that is all that really matters in this situation.ron.reagan said:Do you think any of the protestors are good people?ShooterTX said:ron.reagan said:If you don't understand how good people can't be in the KKK there isn't a lot of common ground here.ShooterTX said:Those are pretty remarkable assumptions on both sides.ron.reagan said:I think a rational argument would be the KKK has 0 good people and these protestors have at least some good people although sightly confusedShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
How do you know that the KKK doesn't have good people who are slightly confused?
How many good people do you know, who chant "Death to America"? Do good people wish death upon an entire nation of people?
Even if there were good people within either of these groups... who cares? Does their confusion mean that we should allow & support the evil that they are supporting? Both the KKK and Hamas are evil, terroristic organizations who want to (and have) murdered innocent people because of their ethnicity. Can you honestly justify some confused persons actions, when they support these terroristic murderers?
Or is it that you just hate America and the Jews... and don't want to admit it to yourself or anyone else?
I never said that there are good people in the KKK. I simply pointed out how stupid it is to claim one group is completely devoid of anyone good, while you make exceptions for the other group.
Clearly, you just hate Jews and Americans. Why can't you just admit it?
Want to protest, get a permit, schedule the event, and disperse when it is over. Otherwise, you are not a good person.
Getting a permit magically doesn't disrupt any ones day.
Got it.
Frank Galvin said:ShooterTX said:Frank Galvin said:You are really, really missing the point. The reason you protect free speeech at the margins is so that it doesn't get to Galileo.ShooterTX said:Frank Galvin said:We certainly can and have. Being enthusiastic about the should is terrifying. They arrested Galileo for the heresy that the sun, rather than the earth, was the center of the solar system.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:We can, have, and should arrest people for what they say. I don't know why this is even a debate or controversial.Frank Galvin said:ShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
There is a difference between not hosting a speaker and putting a speaker in jail based on the content of their speech. Not speaking for anyone else but my point has been remarkably simple.
We should not be arresting people for the content of what they say. Trespass, obstruction, disorderly, assault, etc. I have no problem with.
Even more remarkable is the number of alleged conservatives who disagree and think the content of the speech (ie anti-semitism) alone justifies criminal penalty.
Apples & Oranges... big time!
How many times did Galileo call for "Death to the Earthers"? How many times did he call for a genocide against his opponents?
Free speech is for people like Galileo... who engage in debate, conversation and discussion. It is not for people like Osama Bin Laden or these terrorists on our campuses. These are not people who are calling for a debate... they are terrorists who are making demands or else they will make good on their threats of violence & genocide. How you cannot see the difference is remarkable.
And apples and oranges is pretty well described by comparing Osama Bin Laden to a misguided sophomre who would rather chant than study.
That would be true if the student were not chanting the exact words of Osama Bin Laden.
And millions of others who never did a thing to us.
There was a guy a couple of streets over from me who flew a F Biden flag for about a year after the election. Should we have arrested him for inciting people to rape the President?
ron.reagan said:Do you think any of the protestors are good people?ShooterTX said:I don't care if they are "good people" or not... they are advocating for evil. They are calling for genocide and violence against our nation... that is all that really matters in this situation.ron.reagan said:Do you think any of the protestors are good people?ShooterTX said:ron.reagan said:If you don't understand how good people can't be in the KKK there isn't a lot of common ground here.ShooterTX said:Those are pretty remarkable assumptions on both sides.ron.reagan said:I think a rational argument would be the KKK has 0 good people and these protestors have at least some good people although sightly confusedShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
How do you know that the KKK doesn't have good people who are slightly confused?
How many good people do you know, who chant "Death to America"? Do good people wish death upon an entire nation of people?
Even if there were good people within either of these groups... who cares? Does their confusion mean that we should allow & support the evil that they are supporting? Both the KKK and Hamas are evil, terroristic organizations who want to (and have) murdered innocent people because of their ethnicity. Can you honestly justify some confused persons actions, when they support these terroristic murderers?
Or is it that you just hate America and the Jews... and don't want to admit it to yourself or anyone else?
I never said that there are good people in the KKK. I simply pointed out how stupid it is to claim one group is completely devoid of anyone good, while you make exceptions for the other group.
Clearly, you just hate Jews and Americans. Why can't you just admit it?
There's no such thing as a good person. All human beings are inclined towards evil, though some people's moral compass is more "off" than others.
What's interesting to me is that Hamas would gladly cut the heads off of any LGBTQ, abortionist, or feminist- causes these protesters gladly support. They are not their friends. When it comes down to is that the modern nihilistic atheist is so lost and confused that they will latch onto any sort of cause that gives them purpose, validation, or simple camaraderie. If you simply turn into cosmic dust when you die, none of this dumb protesting actually matters since there's no clear standard for "evil"
you know damn well that when someone says "F ____" it is not a call for rape. You also know damn well that when people chant "Death to America", they are calling for violent action to destroy our nation.Frank Galvin said:ShooterTX said:Frank Galvin said:You are really, really missing the point. The reason you protect free speeech at the margins is so that it doesn't get to Galileo.ShooterTX said:Frank Galvin said:We certainly can and have. Being enthusiastic about the should is terrifying. They arrested Galileo for the heresy that the sun, rather than the earth, was the center of the solar system.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:We can, have, and should arrest people for what they say. I don't know why this is even a debate or controversial.Frank Galvin said:ShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
There is a difference between not hosting a speaker and putting a speaker in jail based on the content of their speech. Not speaking for anyone else but my point has been remarkably simple.
We should not be arresting people for the content of what they say. Trespass, obstruction, disorderly, assault, etc. I have no problem with.
Even more remarkable is the number of alleged conservatives who disagree and think the content of the speech (ie anti-semitism) alone justifies criminal penalty.
Apples & Oranges... big time!
How many times did Galileo call for "Death to the Earthers"? How many times did he call for a genocide against his opponents?
Free speech is for people like Galileo... who engage in debate, conversation and discussion. It is not for people like Osama Bin Laden or these terrorists on our campuses. These are not people who are calling for a debate... they are terrorists who are making demands or else they will make good on their threats of violence & genocide. How you cannot see the difference is remarkable.
And apples and oranges is pretty well described by comparing Osama Bin Laden to a misguided sophomre who would rather chant than study.
That would be true if the student were not chanting the exact words of Osama Bin Laden.
And millions of others who never did a thing to us.
There was a guy a couple of streets over from me who flew a F Biden flag for about a year after the election. Should we have arrested him for inciting people to rape the President?
That is the weakest **** you have stated so far... and that is really saying something.
ShooterTX
Asked and answered.ron.reagan said:Do you think any of the protestors are good people?ShooterTX said:I don't care if they are "good people" or not... they are advocating for evil. They are calling for genocide and violence against our nation... that is all that really matters in this situation.ron.reagan said:Do you think any of the protestors are good people?ShooterTX said:ron.reagan said:If you don't understand how good people can't be in the KKK there isn't a lot of common ground here.ShooterTX said:Those are pretty remarkable assumptions on both sides.ron.reagan said:I think a rational argument would be the KKK has 0 good people and these protestors have at least some good people although sightly confusedShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
How do you know that the KKK doesn't have good people who are slightly confused?
How many good people do you know, who chant "Death to America"? Do good people wish death upon an entire nation of people?
Even if there were good people within either of these groups... who cares? Does their confusion mean that we should allow & support the evil that they are supporting? Both the KKK and Hamas are evil, terroristic organizations who want to (and have) murdered innocent people because of their ethnicity. Can you honestly justify some confused persons actions, when they support these terroristic murderers?
Or is it that you just hate America and the Jews... and don't want to admit it to yourself or anyone else?
I never said that there are good people in the KKK. I simply pointed out how stupid it is to claim one group is completely devoid of anyone good, while you make exceptions for the other group.
Clearly, you just hate Jews and Americans. Why can't you just admit it?
There is no way for me to know if they are "good people" or not. All I can judge them on is their actions, and in this case their actions are hateful, evil and dangerous.
You can't know if they are "good people" either... so the question is as stupid as you are.
And what is the legal definition of "good people" anyway? What are the exact measures used to quantify if someone falls into the category of "good people"?
ShooterTX
Frank Galvin said:ShooterTX said:Frank Galvin said:You are really, really missing the point. The reason you protect free speeech at the margins is so that it doesn't get to Galileo.ShooterTX said:Frank Galvin said:We certainly can and have. Being enthusiastic about the should is terrifying. They arrested Galileo for the heresy that the sun, rather than the earth, was the center of the solar system.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:We can, have, and should arrest people for what they say. I don't know why this is even a debate or controversial.Frank Galvin said:ShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
There is a difference between not hosting a speaker and putting a speaker in jail based on the content of their speech. Not speaking for anyone else but my point has been remarkably simple.
We should not be arresting people for the content of what they say. Trespass, obstruction, disorderly, assault, etc. I have no problem with.
Even more remarkable is the number of alleged conservatives who disagree and think the content of the speech (ie anti-semitism) alone justifies criminal penalty.
Apples & Oranges... big time!
How many times did Galileo call for "Death to the Earthers"? How many times did he call for a genocide against his opponents?
Free speech is for people like Galileo... who engage in debate, conversation and discussion. It is not for people like Osama Bin Laden or these terrorists on our campuses. These are not people who are calling for a debate... they are terrorists who are making demands or else they will make good on their threats of violence & genocide. How you cannot see the difference is remarkable.
And apples and oranges is pretty well described by comparing Osama Bin Laden to a misguided sophomre who would rather chant than study.
That would be true if the student were not chanting the exact words of Osama Bin Laden.
And millions of others who never did a thing to us.
There was a guy a couple of streets over from me who flew a F Biden flag for about a year after the election. Should we have arrested him for inciting people to rape the President?
That's a poor example, as courts consider useage/meaning. F word will never be enough.
What about "death to Jews?" "Death to Israel," no.
NEW: UT Austin has suspended the Palestinian Solidarity Committee.
— steven monacelli (@stevanzetti) April 26, 2024
"UT's suspension of the Palestine Solidarity Committee is an attack on free speech to distract from and enable israel's genocidal campaign against the Palestinian people," the group said in a statement.
BREAKING: 165 UT Faculty wrote a letter to President Jay Hartzell condemning his use of "heavy police intervention" during Wednesday's pro-Palestine protest.
— The Daily Texan (@thedailytexan) April 26, 2024
boognish_bear said:BREAKING: 165 UT Faculty wrote a letter to President Jay Hartzell condemning his use of "heavy police intervention" during Wednesday's pro-Palestine protest.
— The Daily Texan (@thedailytexan) April 26, 2024
I'm surprised it's that few…
A pro-Palestine extremist by the @Columbia University encampment threatens to kill someone off camera and makes repeated anti-gay and anti-white slurs. pic.twitter.com/8fKpLcYGFr
— Andy Ngô 🏳️🌈 (@MrAndyNgo) April 26, 2024
Whoever it is that wins this next election, on the first day of his administration go to a public square and call for the murder of that president to happen on the first day he is out of office (so it's not "imminent"). See how far that takes you.Frank Galvin said:ShooterTX said:Frank Galvin said:You are really, really missing the point. The reason you protect free speeech at the margins is so that it doesn't get to Galileo.ShooterTX said:Frank Galvin said:We certainly can and have. Being enthusiastic about the should is terrifying. They arrested Galileo for the heresy that the sun, rather than the earth, was the center of the solar system.BusyTarpDuster2017 said:We can, have, and should arrest people for what they say. I don't know why this is even a debate or controversial.Frank Galvin said:ShooterTX said:
This is all very interesting.
Many here keep talking about free speech, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that most universities abandon free speech decades ago.
If a group wanted to hold a KKK protest on campus, it would be denied. Any students who illegally started or participated in such a racist event would be arrested and most likely expelled from campus.
The reality is that universities have been shutting down certain types of speech for many years now. Just look at what happens when Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, or others on the right are invited to speak at Berkley.
So if a university can ban KKK rallies because the KKK is a hateful, racist, terrorist group; why can't they do the same for the hateful, racist, terrorist Hamas/Gaza groups?
This isn't some watershed moment. If anything, it is remarkably consistent.
There is a difference between not hosting a speaker and putting a speaker in jail based on the content of their speech. Not speaking for anyone else but my point has been remarkably simple.
We should not be arresting people for the content of what they say. Trespass, obstruction, disorderly, assault, etc. I have no problem with.
Even more remarkable is the number of alleged conservatives who disagree and think the content of the speech (ie anti-semitism) alone justifies criminal penalty.
Apples & Oranges... big time!
How many times did Galileo call for "Death to the Earthers"? How many times did he call for a genocide against his opponents?
Free speech is for people like Galileo... who engage in debate, conversation and discussion. It is not for people like Osama Bin Laden or these terrorists on our campuses. These are not people who are calling for a debate... they are terrorists who are making demands or else they will make good on their threats of violence & genocide. How you cannot see the difference is remarkable.
And apples and oranges is pretty well described by comparing Osama Bin Laden to a misguided sophomre who would rather chant than study.
That would be true if the student were not chanting the exact words of Osama Bin Laden.
And millions of others who never did a thing to us.
There was a guy a couple of streets over from me who flew a F Biden flag for about a year after the election. Should we have arrested him for inciting people to rape the President?
There is no way to tell if he is a good person or not according to the ethics scholars in this threadJack Bauer said:A pro-Palestine extremist by the @Columbia University encampment threatens to kill someone off camera and makes repeated anti-gay and anti-white slurs. pic.twitter.com/8fKpLcYGFr
— Andy Ngô 🏳️🌈 (@MrAndyNgo) April 26, 2024
ron.reagan said:There is no way to tell if he is a good person or not according to the ethics scholars in this threadJack Bauer said:A pro-Palestine extremist by the @Columbia University encampment threatens to kill someone off camera and makes repeated anti-gay and anti-white slurs. pic.twitter.com/8fKpLcYGFr
— Andy Ngô 🏳️🌈 (@MrAndyNgo) April 26, 2024
There is no way for YOU to determine if a person is good or evil.
You lack the abilities to determine that and are in no position to judge what is evil Mr. War monger
Leave moral judgements to the non Trotskyites
They all want to be revolutionaries until the consequences arrive. https://t.co/IYmzL5SkFs
— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) April 26, 2024
Sure there is. E.g, if they are in the KKK they are not a good person. It's not hard little manRedbrickbear said:ron.reagan said:There is no way to tell if he is a good person or not according to the ethics scholars in this threadJack Bauer said:A pro-Palestine extremist by the @Columbia University encampment threatens to kill someone off camera and makes repeated anti-gay and anti-white slurs. pic.twitter.com/8fKpLcYGFr
— Andy Ngô 🏳️🌈 (@MrAndyNgo) April 26, 2024
There is no way for YOU to determine if a person is good or evil.
You lack the abilities to determine that and are in no position to judge what is evil Mr. War monger
Leave moral judgements to the non Trotskyites
ron.reagan said:Sure there is. E.g, if they are in the KKK they are not a good person. It's not hard little manRedbrickbear said:ron.reagan said:There is no way to tell if he is a good person or not according to the ethics scholars in this threadJack Bauer said:A pro-Palestine extremist by the @Columbia University encampment threatens to kill someone off camera and makes repeated anti-gay and anti-white slurs. pic.twitter.com/8fKpLcYGFr
— Andy Ngô 🏳️🌈 (@MrAndyNgo) April 26, 2024
There is no way for YOU to determine if a person is good or evil.
You lack the abilities to determine that and are in no position to judge what is evil Mr. War monger
Leave moral judgements to the non Trotskyites
Look we all know you're a statist leftist authoritarian but in America we don't just ban groups because you think they are bad. Or condemn people without trial.
That might the liberal authoritarian place of your dreams but thankful America is still free (for now)