[jaydee]

These freaks have apparently been distributing "recruitment" posters in mailboxes in the Vancouver area: http://www.nationalvanguard.org/ .

I'm no left wing politically correct bleeding heart, but these Hitler Fan Club furballs are dangerously stupid; White Power at its most ignorant. Seig heil!

 

[kizzi77]

Sounds like free speech to me.

 

[jaydee]

Sounds like free speech to me.

I didn't say they shouldn't speak. I just said that what they were saying is the product of small ignorant minds. There is a line somewhere between free speech and the incitement of racist hate crimes.

 

[kizzi77]

I didn't say they shouldn't speak. I just said that what they were saying is the product of small ignorant minds. There is a line somewhere between free speech and the incitement of racist hate crimes.

If you check the link you posted, there's nothing at all about the incitement of hate crimes. I dont exactly understand where youre going with this.

 

[DirtyDog]

Sounds like free speech to me.

This is oviously a bigoted and hateful organization. The only people that would defend them are the ones that are of like mind. I'm going to guess you are from a red state?

 

[kinghami3]

This is oviously a bigoted and hateful organization. The only people that would defend them are the ones that are of like mind. I'm going to guess you are from a red state?

This sight is utter rubbish; bigoted an hateful. However, I couldn't find anything condoning violence.

I hate the fact that the red states can be generalized as Christian with a higher than norm racist population and lower than norm education levels.

 

[Tenchiro]

As much as I dislike these kinds of people, I do love free speech. What kind of free speech laws do you have in Canada?

 

[Tenchiro]

This is oviously a bigoted and hateful organization. The only people that would defend them are the ones that are of like mind. I'm going to guess you are from a red state?

Just remember, we don't need the 1st Ammendment to protect popular speech.

 

[DirtyDog]

As much as I dislike these kinds of people, I do love free speech.

Thats easy to say when you are whitey on the side of the powerful. If you were one of the ones on the other end of this issue you might think differently.

Free speech was intended to protect our rights to speak against the government without fear of reprisal. How does hateful rhetoric towards minorities fit this scenario?

This is not an issue of free speech. Nobody is saying the government should shut these guys down are they? No? So its not a freedom of speech protection issue at all (as silly as that is anyway). Self appointed Internet free speech advocates are a funny group.

We are merely stating that these small minded hateful morons are the worst kind of humanity and should be viewed as such.

 

[Tenchiro]

Thats easy to say when you are whitey on the side of the powerful. If you were one of the ones on the other end of this issue you might think differently.

Free speech was intended to protect our rights to speak against the government without fear of reprisal. How does hateful rhetoric towards minorities fit this scenario?

This is not an issue of free speech. Nobody is saying the government should shut these guys down are they? No? So its not a freedom of speech protection issue at all (as silly as that is anyway). Self appointed Internet free speech advocates are a funny group.

We are merely stating that these small minded hateful morons are the worst kind of humanity and should be viewed as such.

I find their ideas disgusting, I just don't have a problem with these people expressing them.

 

[fluff]

I find their ideas disgusting, I just don't have a problem with these people expressing them.

Is there any point at which you would find people expressing ideas a problem?

 

[Tenchiro]

Is there any point at which you would find people expressing ideas a problem?

I don't think that I could consider myself an American if I did.

 

[fluff]

I don't think that I could consider myself an American if I did.

I'm not trying to be a smartass here but I do think that the issue is not really as clear cut as that. Consider the role played by RTLM in the Rwandan genocide.

Where free speech meets inflammatory rhetoric that exhorts people to take innocent lives, where should we draw the line?

 

[Tenchiro]

I'm not trying to be a smartass here but I do think that the issue is not really as clear cut as that. Consider the role played by RTLM in the Rwandan genocide.

Where free speech meets inflammatory rhetoric that exhorts people to take innocent lives, where should we draw the line?

We should draw the line at peoples actions, not their ideas. If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.

 

[fluff]

We should draw the line at peoples actions, not their ideas. If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.

But if person A incites persons B through Z to commit genocide then all person whilst persons B-Z have killed, person A has done nothing wrong in your view?

 

[kizzi77]

Free speech was intended to protect our rights to speak against the government without fear of reprisal. How does hateful rhetoric towards minorities fit this scenario?

If they're pushing a political agenda (which they obviously are) then I think the 1st Ammendment correctly applies here. I dont exactly see where you're coming from. Anti-abortion types may just as well see pro-choice rhetoric as "hateful" but I dont see you lambasting them.
Oh, that's right. You're far too liberal to make that connection..obviously.

 

[kinghami3]

But if person A incites persons B through Z to commit genocide then all person whilst persons B-Z have killed, person A has done nothing wrong in your view?

If you blame something on a chain reaction, then we're all guilty of something. The question to be asked is if person A had the intention of making person B commit the crime.

 

[Tenchiro]

But if person A incites persons B through Z to commit genocide then all person whilst persons B-Z have killed, person A has done nothing wrong in your view?

All this site seems to be doing is spinning daily news articles with racist ideas. I looked through it and saw nothing that was inciting anyone taking any specific action.

 

[DirtyDog]

If they're pushing a political agenda (which they obviously are) then I think the 1st Ammendment correctly applies here. I dont exactly see where you're coming from. Anti-abortion types may just as well see pro-choice rhetoric as "hateful" but I dont see you lambasting them.
Oh, that's right. You're far too liberal to make that connection..obviously.

Are the minority groups being targeted because they are pro-choice or any other pseudo-hateful organization? No? Then how the hell does this have ANYTHING to do with what we are talking about?

 

[kizzi77]

Are the minority groups being targeted because they are pro-choice or any other pseudo-hateful organization? No? Then how the hell does this have ANYTHING to do with what we are talking about?

And you prove my point even further. Good luck to you in future debates.

 

[jaydee]

If you check the link you posted, there's nothing at all about the incitement of hate crimes. I dont exactly understand where youre going with this.

They showed the poster that this group was stuffing into mailboxes on the CTV news last night. I wish I could have attached it here. It was along the lines of "if you ain't a white hetero Christian (preferably fundamentalist), you should be exterminated, and if you are, how would you like to sign up for our nice little Nazi club". You don't have to be explicitly directing people to kill other people to promote hate crimes. Even knotheads can read between the lines.

 

[jaydee]

As much as I dislike these kinds of people, I do love free speech. What kind of free speech laws do you have in Canada?

If you say anything politically incorrect, you have to wash your mouth out with soap.

 

[jaydee]

Thats easy to say when you are whitey on the side of the powerful. If you were one of the ones on the other end of this issue you might think differently.

Free speech was intended to protect our rights to speak against the government without fear of reprisal. How does hateful rhetoric towards minorities fit this scenario?

This is not an issue of free speech. Nobody is saying the government should shut these guys down are they? No? So its not a freedom of speech protection issue at all (as silly as that is anyway). Self appointed Internet free speech advocates are a funny group.

We are merely stating that these small minded hateful morons are the worst kind of humanity and should be viewed as such.

Thank you, BD. That's exactly what I was trying to say, in my usual hyperbolic manner.

 

[LordOpie]

Free speech is important so we know who the haters are.

 

[Ciaran]

I don't think that I could consider myself an American if I did.

Along with freedom comes responsibility. Just because one CAN say anything does not mean that one SHOULD say anything.

 

[stevew]

I'd rather be childish....

 

[Tenchiro]

Along with freedom comes responsibility. Just because one CAN say anything does not mean that one SHOULD say anything.

But we can and that is what is important. And remember, while everyone has the right to speak their mind, doesnt mean they have the right to be taken seriously. Or that anyone else has the right to not be offended for that matter.

Plus LordOpie makes a good point.

 

[fluff]

All this site seems to be doing is spinning daily news articles with racist ideas. I looked through it and saw nothing that was inciting anyone taking any specific action.

I was not talking about that particular site, more about the prinicple in general. As kinghami3 says if there is the intention to incite others to commit crime then freedom of speech can have its dangers.

In a situation (such as currently exists in Paris) where tensions are running high an influencial person can have a dramatic effect simply through the things they say. An inflammatory speech given at the wrong time in the wrong place really can cost lives. Is freedom of speech without limits really everything it is cracked up to be?

Should freedom of speech include freedom to lie?

 

[Tenchiro]

I was not talking about that particular site, more about the prinicple in general. As kinghami3 says if there is the intention to incite others to commit crime then freedom of speech can have its dangers.

In a situation (such as currently exists in Paris) where tensions are running high an influencial person can have a dramatic effect simply through the things they say. An inflammatory speech given at the wrong time in the wrong place really can cost lives. Is freedom of speech without limits really everything it is cracked up to be?

Should freedom of speech include freedom to lie?

I think Thomas Jefferson said it best; "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it. ". Since he was a much wiser man that I can ever hope to be, I have to trust him.

 

[fluff]

I think Thomas Jefferson said it best; "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it. ". Since he was a much wiser man that I can ever hope to be, I have to trust him.

Jeez, 'incovenience'? Being dead is one hell of an incovenience for quite a few (ex-)Rwandans. If you think that is overstating the significance of what inflammatory speech can do then feel free to check out RTLM's role in the genocide.

Abdicating your reason to any man, especially one who lived so long ago, certainly does lack wisdom.

 

[Tenchiro]

Jeez, 'incovenience'? Being dead is one hell of an incovenience for quite a few (ex-)Rwandans. If you think that is overstating the significance of what inflammatory speech can do then feel free to check out RTLM's role in the genocide.

Abdicating your reason to any man, especially one who lived so long ago, certainly does lack wisdom.

Don't kid yourself, free speech had nothing to do with the genocide in Rwanda, just like it had nothing to do with the holocaust in Germany. These were evil people who were allowed to do evil things.

It is a two way street. Sure someone may incite people do to evil with "inflammatory" speech. But then again people like Martin Luther King, Susan B. Anthony & Thomas Jefferson have done great things with the same tool. None of these people were popular with the status quo, all of them were thought to be agitators, and even traitors. Would women and black people be thought of as equal today if it weren't for inflammatory speech? Would the USA even exist?

The fact that someone may convince people to do bad things is a necessary evil, because of all the good that same tool can bring the world.

 

[fluff]

Don't kid yourself, free speech had nothing to do with the genocide in Rwanda, just like it had nothing to do with the holocaust in Germany. These were evil people who were allowed to do evil things.

Have you checked it out or are you simply saying what's needed to defend your position? People involved with RTLM have been charged with war-crimes.

I had hoped we would buck Goodwins law, but it remains a pipe-dream.

Don't kid yourself.

It is a two way street. Sure someone may incite people do to evil with "inflammatory" speech. But then again people like Martin Luther King, Susan B. Anthony & Thomas Jefferson have done great things with the same tool. None of these people were popular with the status quo, all of them were thought to be agitators, and even traitors. Would women and black people be thought of as equal today if it weren't for inflammatory speech? Would the USA even exist?

The fact that someone may convince people to do bad things is a necessary evil, because of all the good that same tool can bring the world.

Do you believe in freedom of action? I ask because speech is an action. Some people do great things with lasers, knives or drugs, others evil, yet we do not see those as a necessary evil, we prosecute them. There is no good reason why freedom of speech needs to exist any more than freedom to take whatever is not nailed down. I am surprised that you have such a black and white view.

 

[enkidu]

. . .Do you believe in freedom of action? I ask because speech is an action. . .

Didn't Bush & Co. just exercise their freedom to make "creative speeches" to drag us into the bottomless quagmire of wars?

 

[Reactor]

Thats easy to say when you are whitey on the side of the powerful. If you were one of the ones on the other end of this issue you might think differently.

Amen to that. I'm a buddhist and there is no end to the mindless crap I put up with every day. I've even been ordered to go to the employee Christmas party. Then I was actually asked to sing christmas carols in the choir! On top of which I have to explain to people why they can't wear religious jewelry when they are supposed to be representing an organization that's expected to be fair and unbiased. I can't even imagine the crap minorities must put up with in some places.

 

[stevew]

Amen to that. I'm a buddhist and there is no end to the mindless crap I put up with every day. I've even been ordered to go to the employee Christmas party. Then I was actually asked to sing christmas carols in the choir! On top of which I have to explain to people why they can't wear religious jewelry when they are supposed to be representing an organization that's expected to be fair and unbiased. I can't even imagine the crap minorities must put up with in some places.

So I take it you work on Christmas and Easter?

 

[LordOpie]

I'd think Christians would be offended by Christmas... it's become a commercial holiday with no meaning. Hell, I'm a jew and I "celebrate" it. It's a wonderful time of year

 

[Tenchiro]

Have you checked it out or are you simply saying what's needed to defend your position? People involved with RTLM have been charged with war-crimes.

The conflict between the Hutu and the Tutsi had nothing to do with free speech, even though that was one of the tools used. There have been power stuggles between the two groups for hundreds of years.

There is no good reason why freedom of speech needs to exist any more than freedom to take whatever is not nailed down. I am surprised that you have such a black and white view.

Are you really comparing the expression of ideas, to theft?!?

 

[fluff]

The conflict between the Hutu and the Tutsi had nothing to do with free speech, even though that was one of the tools used. There have been power stuggles between the two groups for hundreds of years.

Are you really comparing the expression of ideas, to theft?!?

No, I am comparing the reasons for it to exist as some kind of inspired 'right'. So why not explain why you see the right to free speech as so sacrosanct, when nothing else appears to be so?

I am very aware of the background of the Hutu and Tutsi ethnic groups. I am also aware that this split did not exist for hundreds of years, it was created in the late 19th century by Belgian colonists. I am furthermore very much aware of the part played in the genocide by the broadcasts of RTLM, inflaming the mob.

 

[Reactor]

So I take it you work on Christmas and Easter?

Quite often. It's the best time to do major systems upgrades. Officially I'm given offset time and allowed to take a different day off. Official policy is that employees can get alternate days off and work holidays, but in practice it has never been allowed. The first page of out HR manual says that anything in the manual is subject to change whenever and for whoever the management chooses.

 

[Tenchiro]

No, I am comparing the reasons for it to exist as some kind of inspired 'right'. So why not explain why you see the right to free speech as so sacrosanct, when nothing else appears to be so?

Look. If you don't get why free speech is so important, then I won't be able to explain it to you.