What's new
By:

Second Attempt at Stand-up Comedy

Hantlers said:
In my defense it wasn't deliberate filter avoidance on my part. I just copy and pasted it from a board that lets more stuff go than this one. And I still don't see how it's hate speech.
Click to expand...

the quote advocated an act of violence against a person or group of people based upon a particular charateristic, that is hate speech - whether any of you agree or not doesn't matter

Hate speech is, outside the law, any communication that disparages a person or a group on the basis of some characteristic such as race, gender, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, or other characteristic.[1][2]

In law, hate speech is any speech, gesture or conduct, writing, or display which is forbidden because it may incite violence or prejudicial action against or by a protected individual or group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected individual or group.
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech
 
I just saw this on the news...Tracy Morgan is awesome!!!!! It's too bad he apologized, but he kind of had to for the sake of his career.

Tolerance...it only works one way for some people.
 
comprehension... it doesn't work at all for some people



(note: this comment is not directed at Sloanfeld, but it was inspired by his comment in the post above)
 
This actually does raise an interesting point of discussion: is "hate-speech" protected by the constitution? Is it constitutional to have a law restricting freedom of expression in any way? I understand the laws of libel/slander, but that usually revolves around some level of falsehood. "Hate-speech" is someone's opinion. I am not advocating "hate-speech" at all, just wondering about the constitutionality of restricting it. I do not agree with speaking that way, but I will defend to the death your right to say it, is that how the saying goes?




[edit: this also has nothing to do with this website restricting it, as the owners/operators have the right to choose what to moderate]
 
bania2.jpg
 
LogGrad98 said:
This actually does raise an interesting point of discussion: is "hate-speech" protected by the constitution? Is it constitutional to have a law restricting freedom of expression in any way? I understand the laws of libel/slander, but that usually revolves around some level of falsehood. "Hate-speech" is someone's opinion. I am not advocating "hate-speech" at all, just wondering about the constitutionality of restricting it. I do not agree with speaking that way, but I will defend to the death your right to say it, is that how the saying goes?




[edit: this also has nothing to do with this website restricting it, as the owners/operators have the right to choose what to moderate]
Click to expand...

the wikipedia article cited in my earlier post actually discusses this, and how it's treated differently in different countries. I don't recall the specifics off the top of my head, but as I recall, the U.S. treats it differently than many other countries

to save anyone who's curious a bit of trouble, here's part of it:
There is a strong international consensus that hate speech is incompatible with free speech, but the United States is perhaps unique among much of the developed world in that under law hate speech regulation is incompatible with free speech.[8]
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech

the article goes into a bit of detail for a variety of specific countries, and it also mentions that there has been debate among countires of the U.N. about how freedom of speech applies to the internet
 
Every comic has done a joke like this, all this shows is Tracy Morgan hadn't worked out the "warm-fuzzy" kinks to soften the landing.
 
So I didn't know what Morgan said 'til I just asked my girlfriend and I found it lolz hilarious. Seriously, I didn't hear it in context but the n word pretty much clarified that it's a joke. At least for me.

I say, "Good for you Tracy Morgan."
 
LogGrad98 said:
This actually does raise an interesting point of discussion: is "hate-speech" protected by the constitution? Is it constitutional to have a law restricting freedom of expression in any way? I understand the laws of libel/slander, but that usually revolves around some level of falsehood. "Hate-speech" is someone's opinion. I am not advocating "hate-speech" at all, just wondering about the constitutionality of restricting it. I do not agree with speaking that way, but I will defend to the death your right to say it, is that how the saying goes?




[edit: this also has nothing to do with this website restricting it, as the owners/operators have the right to choose what to moderate]
Click to expand...

Yes. We need to censor thought. We must censor all thought that is not with the majority. Let us get this on the books a.s.a.p. You are either with us or you are against us. If you are with us then you are free to speak your mind. If not then you are a hating hater face.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top