forums.rs

Forums

Is free speech important?

Quick find code: 23-24-301-66036000

of 19
Jaydos
Dec Member 2023

Jaydos

Posts: 494 Silver Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Pk3hitz said :

Say whatever you want, but don't expect the taxpayers to pay for your protection when you say something that a group of people don't like.
Pk3hitz said :

I will defend your right to spout out your nonsense about some utopian ideal about free speech. But if you are that stupid to think you should be able to say just about anything without responsibility for your words... Don't blame me when reality catches up with you. I would love to become your reality.

19-Aug-2018 01:33:18 - Last edited on 19-Aug-2018 01:35:46 by Jaydos

Haukur

Haukur

Posts: 1,384 Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
It seems that in this day and age, anything that some one does not agree with is hate speech. There used to be a time when people could hold open discussions with out being accused of being phobic this ist that.

When I was younger, if you did not agree with what some one said, you either voiced your oppinion as a civil person, or ignored them. Though there was some cases in which words would lead to physical altercations and fists a flying. But that was mainly when some one said something nasty about your family, especialy your mother.

Then it became your duty to uphold and defend her honor. But sadly things have changed, and not for the better. Now adays if what you say does not fit the narrative that the other person or persons believe, then you must be silenced. For you are phobic this, or ist that. This applies to both sides of the political spectrum.

And it is rather sad. The rise of the SJW is sickening. Don't ever think the reason I am peaceful is because I do not know how to be violent.
Ekki hugsa alltaf að ég sé friðsælt vegna þess að ég veit ekki hvernig á að vera ofbeldi.

19-Aug-2018 01:36:15

Raleirosen

Raleirosen

Posts: 5,069 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Telcis said :
To clarify my use of can of worms, its not that its impossible to come to a reasonable conclusion. Its just that I recognize the depth of discussion that would be required to approach the topic and reach said conclusion. eh, from my perspective it's not that deep. historically, the idea has been discussed in depth and successfully applied in practice. the more significant conversations have to do with how technology supports/undercuts free expression, I think.
Pk3hitz said :
Your post proves that you feel you have to educate the "independent thinking audience" instead of just letting them read the posts for themselves. haha, why are you putting that in quotes? they're your own words. I was making fun of you for thinking of your posts that way because it proves how you feel about your interactions with other human beings, at least in this form: as some kind of public contest. Patrolling Lore FC almost makes you wish for a Great Revision.

19-Aug-2018 01:44:31

Telcis

Telcis

Posts: 19,270 Opal Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Raleirosen said :
eh, from my perspective it's not that deep. historically, the idea has been discussed in depth and successfully applied in practice. the more significant conversations have to do with how technology supports/undercuts free expression, I think.

I can agree to that, I hadn't really thought about classification of harm in depth prior to this.

19-Aug-2018 01:55:22

Pk3hitz

Pk3hitz

Posts: 91 Iron Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
You have no idea about my interactions with other human beings or my cognitive leaps. You live in gigantic bubble, and this whole conversation proved it. The funny thing is that you can't see that big bubble yourself. Wake up. Your school indoctrinated you. Wake up.

19-Aug-2018 01:57:30

Telcis

Telcis

Posts: 19,270 Opal Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Pk3hitz said :
Wake up.

I think what they are saying is that you need to provide the logical steps between your "leaps" so that it can show that your argument has a strong foundation.
Being able to prove each step of thought is logical generally proves the outcome based on the information you have. ( I am aware of the fallacy associated with this, dw.)

So could you please inform the sheeple of your steps of thought.

19-Aug-2018 02:10:51

Raleirosen

Raleirosen

Posts: 5,069 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Haukur said :
Then it became your duty to uphold and defend her honor. But sadly things have changed, and not for the better. Now adays if what you say does not fit the narrative that the other person or persons believe, then you must be silenced. For you are phobic this, or ist that. This applies to both sides of the political spectrum.

And it is rather sad. The rise of the SJW is sickening. it's pretty interesting to think about that kind of honor culture as preferable to today's culture of... well, I don't know how to describe it generally. Orwellian insanity? hate speech is more or less the new thoughtcrime, so that fits.
Telcis said :
I can agree to that, I hadn't really thought about classification of harm in depth prior to this. it actually is a big deal because there are certain (thoughtless) people who will try to include emotional harm in the definition, the common chant being "your right to speak ends where my feelings begin" or something similar. the reasons for why that's unworkable and insane are both logical and logistical, as well as pretty obvious, so I won't go into more detail.
Pk3hitz said :
I'm not writing for the sheeple, only for those with eyes to see... spoken like a true prophet. I'm guessing LDS? Patrolling Lore FC almost makes you wish for a Great Revision.

19-Aug-2018 02:19:50 - Last edited on 19-Aug-2018 02:29:48 by Raleirosen

Quick find code: 23-24-301-66036000 Back to Top