Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ...
5
6
7
  1. #121
    Deleted
    I didn't realise it was possible to be that scared of The Gays.

  2. #122
    Banned GennGreymane's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Wokeville mah dood
    Posts
    45,475
    Quote Originally Posted by BalwickZaik View Post
    I didn't realise it was possible to be that scared of The Gays.
    What do you mean? Just being near a "the gays" makes you one of the "the gays" and being "the gays" is the worst thing ever because something something icky, gross, its totally my business what you do in your bedroom with another adult, etc etc.

    *mods please understand this is sarcasm*

  3. #123
    Quote Originally Posted by Dzudzadzo View Post
    It's perfectly fine to downplay BLM calling out for spilling police's blood.
    It's perfectly fine to downplay Islamist calling for spilling west's blood.
    It's perfectly fine to downplay feminists call for spilling men's blood.

    It's outragoues to even say that consrervaties will be forced to spill blood.

    Stay classy MMOChamp Gen-OT.
    Please quote one elected governor who did any of that. I'm eagerly awaiting a response.

  4. #124
    Merely a Setback Sunseeker's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    27,037
    Quote Originally Posted by fengosa View Post
    Would you care to cite some of the policies that Hilary will enact that will destroy America?
    Oh booy, there's a door you shouldn't have opened.
    Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.

    Just, be kind.

  5. #125
    Deleted
    In a country where people walk around armed to the teeth, I wonder how the social unrest will unfold in the coming centuries.

    In Europe it wouldnt come off the ground, but in the US? Might as well turn into another civil war at some point.

  6. #126
    Banned JohnBrown1917's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Обединени социалистически щати на Америка
    Posts
    28,394
    Quote Originally Posted by PrimaryColor View Post
    The US has freedom of speech rights. Threatening an idea is protected, as opposed to threatening specific people.
    And that's why I'm glad we have freedom of opinion and not freedom of speech, threats of violence are not okay in my eyes.

    - - - Updated - - -

    So have liberals finally replaced commies/reds as the boogy man in the US?

  7. #127
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    The Justice Department needs to start prosecuting these elected GOP nutjobs and charging them with sedition when they make these kinds of comments.
    Sure, as soon as they start prosecuting the democrats who are breaking laws.

  8. #128
    But what's his stance on Trump wanting to start restricting free speech?

  9. #129
    Blood has already been shed to protect that guy's values. Remember when gay men used to get beaten to death when they were caught out at night?

  10. #130
    Why is there so much talk about gays? He didnt bring it up once. I reckon a lot of left wing tards on here are superimposing their version of what he said over the reality of what he said. So just another day in SJW land. Logic fails so resort to emotionalism
    There is the sad paradox of a world which is more and more sensitive about being politically correct, almost to the point of ridicule, yet does not wish to acknowledge or to respect believers’ faith in God

  11. #131
    Quote Originally Posted by sethman75 View Post
    Why is there so much talk about gays? He didnt bring it up once. I reckon a lot of left wing tards on here are superimposing their version of what he said over the reality of what he said. So just another day in SJW land. Logic fails so resort to emotionalism
    Maybe the part about don't ask don't tell?

    Tard is a nice name for you.

  12. #132
    Quote Originally Posted by sethman75 View Post
    Why is there so much talk about gays? He didnt bring it up once. I reckon a lot of left wing tards on here are superimposing their version of what he said over the reality of what he said. So just another day in SJW land. Logic fails so resort to emotionalism
    Let's be fair; we're commenting on a speech that borders on encouraging Americans to kill one another over ideological differences. The governor of Kentucky is warning people that they might need to murder their countrymen if Hillary Clinton wins the election. The topic is a radical appeal to emotion in itself, designed to illicit fearful response at best, and hatred and sedition at worst.

  13. #133
    The Insane Thage's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Δ Hidden Forbidden Holy Ground
    Posts
    19,105
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Again, this is really just advocating for violence because you don't agree with the results of an election.

    You've liked to cite American history here, but you're citing the wrong time period. You're not mimicking 1776, you're mimicking 1860.
    I like how he tries to say the Revolutionaries just up and decided one day to kill them some Redcoats. The Founding Fathers tried literally everything they could prior, and even then they only voted to secede from Britain by a fairly narrow margin (after much discourse and even a few fistfights). They wrote official complaints to Parliament, protested, resisted without violence, threw British goods into the harbor so they wouldn't have to pay for it, and remained in constant contact (as much as was possible) with Parliament up until they decided to revolt. It's not like they just started gunning down British soldiers out of the blue one day after the Crown sent some new Magistrate they didn't like.

    And anyone who thinks the situation the colonies faced under British Rule can be compared to the situation today simply because the other party has the upper hand at high levels of government needs to crawl out of their bunker every now and then.
    Be seeing you guys on Bloodsail Buccaneers NA!



  14. #134
    Quote Originally Posted by Thage View Post
    I like how he tries to say the Revolutionaries just up and decided one day to kill them some Redcoats. The Founding Fathers tried literally everything they could prior, and even then they only voted to secede from Britain by a fairly narrow margin (after much discourse and even a few fistfights). They wrote official complaints to Parliament, protested, resisted without violence, threw British goods into the harbor so they wouldn't have to pay for it, and remained in constant contact (as much as was possible) with Parliament up until they decided to revolt. It's not like they just started gunning down British soldiers out of the blue one day after the Crown sent some new Magistrate they didn't like.

    And anyone who thinks the situation the colonies faced under British Rule can be compared to the situation today simply because the other party has the upper hand at high levels of government needs to crawl out of their bunker every now and then.
    I don't think he was directly comparing them but making a point. Yes blood had to shed to get where we are right now. That includes everybodies right to have an opinion. That is unless the regressive left are drowning the other point of view out with white noise.
    There is the sad paradox of a world which is more and more sensitive about being politically correct, almost to the point of ridicule, yet does not wish to acknowledge or to respect believers’ faith in God

  15. #135
    Banned JohnBrown1917's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Обединени социалистически щати на Америка
    Posts
    28,394
    Quote Originally Posted by sethman75 View Post
    Why is there so much talk about gays? He didnt bring it up once. I reckon a lot of left wing tards on here are superimposing their version of what he said over the reality of what he said. So just another day in SJW land. Logic fails so resort to emotionalism
    Ahh.. I get it! Its a prank, just a social experiment bro.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by sethman75 View Post
    I don't think he was directly comparing them but making a point. Yes blood had to shed to get where we are right now. That includes everybodies right to have an opinion. That is unless the regressive left are drowning the other point of view out with white noise.
    That is not how white noise works.

  16. #136
    Quote Originally Posted by breadisfunny View Post
    an idea that threatens violence against people is illegal and is NOT PROTECTED under the first amendment. his comments could possibly fall under the sedition act for suggesting an incitation of violence towards the state.
    Only among those ignorant of Supreme Court precedent directly on point, Brandenburg v. Ohio. Speech must create the risk of imminent lawless action and reasonably likely to result in that action. Example being, standing in front of angry group of protestors, pointing to the city council member they are protesting who has just stepped out on the street, and screaming "string him up!" -- not protected speech. Saying at a speech that at some future date and under some uncertain future conditions, that armed revolution may be necessary... that is not only protected speech, that is protected political speech that goes right to the core of why the 1st Amendment is there in the first place.

  17. #137
    The Lightbringer fengosa's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Canada, Eh
    Posts
    3,612
    Quote Originally Posted by Stormdash View Post
    Only among those ignorant of Supreme Court precedent directly on point, Brandenburg v. Ohio. Speech must create the risk of imminent lawless action and reasonably likely to result in that action. Example being, standing in front of angry group of protestors, pointing to the city council member they are protesting who has just stepped out on the street, and screaming "string him up!" -- not protected speech. Saying at a speech that at some future date and under some uncertain future conditions, that armed revolution may be necessary... that is not only protected speech, that is protected political speech that goes right to the core of why the 1st Amendment is there in the first place.
    OK, if you want to put him on trial he'd likely win. Congrats. That doesn't make what he said any less reckless. Let's not forget Donald Trumps vague comment about the second amendment folks stopping Hilary or the thwarted terrorist attacks against a muslim-somali community in Kentucky. There is potential for these words to produce senseless violence regardless of whether it's imminent or post election.

    His speech is perfectly protected under the 1st amendment but that doesn't mean it has any place being said by a politician. There is only a fringe minority who thinks a revolution will solve anything aside from getting the Clive Bundys of this world locked up where they belong.

  18. #138
    Well it is Kentucky. I lost hope on that state ages ago.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    Having the authority to do a thing doesn't make it just, moral, or even correct.

Posting Permissions

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