Discussion in 'The War Room' started by abiG, May 31, 2018.
The First Amendment only applies to America.
I hope this helps.
I'd argue that politics isn't physics and your analogy sucks.
ABC cancelled Roseanne for racist tweets because of the public outrage it created. So although they're trying to pretend that they are taking the moral high ground, I believe the reality was the negative feedback would translate to revenue loss. So I'm not deciding but it does seem that a vocal mass does decide.
Wait, what? Should the USA be enforcing free speech onto its allies? Why can they not figure it out for themselves.
I'll pass on that offer, and instead continue to bebop and scat all over bad ideas that try to smuggle their way in as legitimate.
ben shapiro is ok with that
Whatever floats your boat
I'm cool with hearing your side of things. Maybe less scatting and bopping, and more twerking and jiving though.
well no shit. thats the right of a business.....to protect themselves from the speech of their employees if they deem it necessary.
So many pussies nowadays. Who gets offended by words lmao? Fucking soft!
Fuck! How do you know her?
Ps- Sorry about the f-bomb if you see this ma.
We're snapchat "friends"
I see. I guess that kind of makes sense. She has a thing for "bad boys" and I see you have a yellow.
Some snowflake in the cunt thread got offended.
It wasn't a liberal either. Sad.
Indeed. It's crazy how people get so offended that they feel a need to report someone on a forum. It's pathetic.
I've only reported as a method to troll certain posters. You can't offend me.
I've also reported like porn posts and such because someone's gotta do it, and like KONE during his meltdown.
Partly because a woman called another woman the slur. Also, perhaps, unlike Barr, Bee doesn’t have a history of making the same mistake.
Also, best response tweet by another actress was that the c word was inaccurately because Ivanka “has neither the depth or warmth.”
I'm not sure. In Canada and Europe, Britain and o ya...the rest of the world.
It's kind of one of the most serious problem in the world. You should look into it.
Its not really free speech if you can't speak without fear of repercussion. Let the people decide. If the outrage is there, people won't watch her show.
With all due respect, I do not think you're right on this point at all, and this smacks of both sides-ism. As far as embodying and defending core First Amendment/free speech principles, it seems pretty undeniable to me that the liberals are paradigmatically correct, and the conservatives, centrists, and admittedly reactionary sects of the far left are wrong. The liberal consensus re free speech that rose to prominence between 1950 and 1990 is still the preeminent perspective on free speech.
What you are describing as "cowardly and disingenuous" is core principle of free speech jurisprudence: regulation of public discourse through the marketplace of ideas (which may obviously overlap with or inform the economic marketplace). The liberals mobilizing private institutions toward discouragement of speech that is either incorrect or socially harmful is the exact phenomenon on which a truly libertarian legal speech regime depends for social order. And trying to create some cultural upholding or positive rights allowance of "free expression," particularly that expression which serves to denigrate groups like racial minorities, is to distort, limit, and batter the the very livelihood of the powerless all for the wide-swinging and oppressive freedoms of the powerful.
Also, the "crying to teacher" thing really doesn't make sense. There are bright lines on what is and isn't contravention of free speech rights.
As @VivaRevolution said, the BDS boycott bills represent by far the most offensive, obvious, and categorical affront on free speech, yet people would rather quibble about Roseanne losing her shitty sitcom.
That depends on your definition of hate speech. In many European legal regimes, there is an incitement component to hate speech legislation (such as the statute under which Marine Le Pen was charged). For US jurisprudence, the incitement exception just does all the heavy lifting. There is precedent for persons being arrested and charged for public insults of minorities: obviously, however, the threshold is much, much higher than anything we're discussing here.
Separate names with a comma.