Joe Biden Wins - Becomes 46th president of the United States

[AmandaRose]

So basically you're allowed to have a non-conforming opinion, but you're not allowed to voice your opinion. At that point, you may as well not be able to have that opinion. That's thoughtcrime.

America actually has similar laws in various states. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime_laws_in_the_United_States

 

[UltraSUPRA]

America actually has similar laws in various states. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime_laws_in_the_United_States

Assault != speech.

 

[AmandaRose]

Assault != speech.

Verbal abuse (also verbal attack or verbal assault) is the act of forcefully criticizing, insulting, or denouncing another person. Characterized by underlying anger and hostility, it is a destructive form of communication intended to harm the self-concept of the other person and produce negative emotions.

It is illegal in most countries in the world including America.

 

[UltraSUPRA]

Verbal abuse (also verbal attack or verbal assault) is the act of forcefully criticizing, insulting, or denouncing another person. Characterized by underlying anger and hostility, it is a destructive form of communication intended to harm the self-concept of the other person and produce negative emotions.

It is illegal in most countries in the world including America.

Thank you for certifying that our first amendment has been violated.

 

[Sicklyboy]

Thank you for certifying that our first amendment has been violated.

Buddy, please don't try to go all "blah blah FIRST AMENDMENT" if you don't understand the scope of the first amendment. It makes you look ignorant.

 

[UltraSUPRA]

Buddy, please don't try to go all "blah blah FIRST AMENDMENT" if you don't understand the scope of the first amendment. It makes you look ignorant.

Just like every gun law is an infringement, all speech is free speech.

 

[Sicklyboy]

Just like every gun law is an infringement, all speech is free speech.

So are you advocating for no restrictions on peoples ability to post child pornography on the internet? Because that's "speech" too. Just want to make sure we're on the same page here, feel free to walk that back if you'd like.

 

[AmandaRose]

Thank you for certifying that our first amendment has been violated.

So you are seriously saying doing something like gaslighting someone which is a form of verbal abuse is acceptable.

 

[djpannda]

Assault != speech.

Just like every gun law is an infringement, all speech is free speech.

A person that is more respected than you said"The Second Amendment is just a remnant from revolutionary days. It has no meaning today." - Lisa Simpson

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

So are you advocating for no restrictions on peoples ability to post child pornography on the internet? Because that's "speech" too. Just want to make sure we're on the same page here, feel free to walk that back if you'd like.

Hey are you judging his fetishes? Mind you he’s only 15

 

[jimbo13]

So are you advocating for no restrictions on peoples ability to post child pornography on the internet? Because that's "speech" too. Just want to make sure we're on the same page here, feel free to walk that back if you'd like.

If it is simulated porn /drawgings/cg as distasteful as it is, yes. The acquisition of the content would be the crime., distributing it would be accessory after the fact.

 

[Sicklyboy]

If it is simulated porn /drawgings/cg as distasteful as it is, yes. The acquisition of the content would be the crime., distributing it would be accessory after the fact.

Oh no no no no no we're not walking around the question here. I was very specific in my statement.

 

[jimbo13]

Oh no no no no no we're not walking around the question here. I was very specific in my statement.

Sexually exploiting a child is a crime, that has nothing to do with speech.

 

[Doran754]

And its a good thing we have stronge hate crime laws because it has now made our country one of the most tolerant in the world. And no you are allowed your own thoughts in your home your just not allowed to spread racist/homophobic/transpobic hate to others including the Internet. And let's not forget hat hate crimes are also illegal in England under various different laws. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_the_United_Kingdom

As for the dog incident are you seriously saying that what happened was acceptable? Let me remind you


On 23 April 2018, Scottish YouTuber Mark Meechan of Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire was fined £800 after being found "grossly offensive" for posting a YouTube video that was viewed over 3 million times depicting him training his girlfriend's pug to respond to the phrase "Sieg Heil" by lifting his paw in a Nazi salute.

Not only do i think it was acceptable, I encourage it. Because you, and anybody who thinks like you doesn't get to tell me or anybody else what's funny, what's acceptable and what's a joke. You're not the moral compass for every joke ever made. Context matters, jailing somebody over a joke is never acceptable, unless of course you enjoy living in dictatorships. Of course you think It's acceptable to jail somebody for wrong think.

Scotland: WilliamWallace/JailforWrongthink

 

[UltraSUPRA]

So you are seriously saying doing something like gaslighting someone which is a form of verbal abuse is acceptable.

Yes.

A person that is more respected than you said"The Second Amendment is just a remnant from revolutionary days. It has no meaning today." - Lisa Simpson

>believes that guns should be illegal
>uses a Simpsons quote

 

[Sicklyboy]

Sexually exploiting a child is a crime, that has nothing to do with speech.

I'm also not talking about the act of exploitation. I'm talking about the specific act of distribution. Where or how it came to be, as despicable as it is, is wholly irrelevant to this line of questioning.

 

[Doran754]

Yes.

>believes that guns should be illegal
>uses a Simpsons quote

Lisa, the annoying liberal. Well they're all annoying but the most famous annoying liberal from the show. Of course he quotes her.

 

[UltraSUPRA]

I'm also not talking about the act of exploitation. I'm talking about the specific act of distribution. Where or how it came to be, as despicable as it is, is wholly irrelevant to this line of questioning.

I believe Jimbo explained it perfectly.
Acquisition is illegal, distribution isn't. You can't distribute it without acquiring it first.

 

[omgcat]

Assault != speech.

not true, "In 1942, the U.S. Supreme Court established the doctrine by a 9–0 decision in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire.[3] It held that "insulting or 'fighting words', those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" are among the "well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech the prevention and punishment of [which] … have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem.""

while some jurisdiction have narrowed fighting words, some places like Hawaii allow the use of force in response to fighting words which mostly consists of racist language.

you better make sure you know your hate speech laws in your area before someone blows you away because you used an offensive phrase or racial slur.

 

[AmandaRose]

Yes.

Says it all really that you belive gaslighting which is a form of verbal and mental abuse is acceptable

 

[Sicklyboy]

I believe Jimbo explained it perfectly.
Acquisition is illegal, distribution isn't. You can't distribute it without acquiring it first.

Distribution is VERY MUCH so illegal you goober.

So to circle back on my question - since you think it isn't illegal, do you think distribution of CP is wrong?