Then what and how does the government say what is good morality? Based on who's perimeters?
- - - Updated - - -
You should not jump to conclusions about people. Did I say it was a horrible thing? Be careful or your own bias will judge wrongly.
Last edited by mmoc903ad35b4b; 2017-06-21 at 02:16 PM.
Every single media outlet liberals/far left use, every single comment they make, every single time they exhibit their behavior, the same core values that I've listed are often displayed in them.
It is consistent and never changes, liberals and far left people are unable to accept other views and truly believe that their way is the only way and would be willing to use physical violence to get their way with people, as shown in riots and in several debates where they have repeatedly stated that they would rather take the freedom of having free speech away in order to not offend people.
My argument is not vapid and holds immense truth to it.
And people haven't thought about creating a followup law until now, until the brand new liberal/politically correct cultural shift happened, now people are just finding out about these laws and just how far they can be abused.
Liberals are predictable, they will always resort to a label buzzword whenever they are proven wrong, they will always try to take away your freedom because in their culture, feelings trumps statistics and evidence.
Try again.
Thought is not being policed. Publicly espousing harmful comments is.
Try shouting racist comments in the US at the top of your lungs. Or 'fire'.
But you say it has always been that way, how can it be new?
Anyway, you clearly love to generalize and lop everyone into one basket. Just look at what you say about riots - some people identifying as far left riot, so that immediately has to apply to everyone seen as liberal. Sure. Come, give me statistics and evidence to back up your claims that every single comment made exhibits hate of white men or whatever. I will be waiting on that, because I want to see how you would want to prove such a thing.
However, I will give you one thing though.
"- Will use physical and lethal force to enforce their regulations/laws/opinions on the populace." That is partially correct. Liberal governments will use physical and lethal force to enforce laws at the very least. Because that is what every government does. Though it is funny that you would equate the police stopping an armed robbery or something to be Nazilike or Islamist.
Last edited by Kiri; 2017-06-21 at 02:26 PM.
you can shout racist comments at the top of your lungs, you just can't directly threaten someone. could go outside and scream "death to jews" if you want, but if you say "kill that specific jew right there" then it's a crime.
and it is thought policing to stop people from saying this shit. that's exactly what thought policing is.
this is trash, anyone that supports this is trash.
Freedom of speech as guaranteed by 1A is the right to peaceably assemble, redress grievances with the government, and is protection that congress will not enact laws that favor a religion (*cough*christianity*cough*), prevent practice of religion, or abridge the press.
Freedom of speech, in the colloquial sense and beyond the scope of 1A, does not protect people from the consequences of their speech. In fact, there are many, many restrictions on speech.
Yes I believe there should be a fine line between speech that is unpopular and people don't like and speech that preaches hate and encourages violence. I also don't mean comedy shows or art specifically where people pay for the experience.
But if you are some random jackass that feels the need to hide behind a screen name to shout whatever racist hateful, violent bullshit towards the general public. I have no problem with them tracking you down and lassoing your ass in cuffs and putting you before a judge if your bullshit causes HARM absolutely.
Milli Vanilli, Bigger than Elvis