We need better hate speech laws in the USA

So again, still holding personal opinions and values over the heads of others. I don't care what you think of me BTW that ship sailed long ago. You have only ever expressed selfish desires in a reality you've created for yourself.

 

Could you give some examples? I don't know what you are referring to.

If you want to be Nazi or defend them it's a bit rich to say others are 'selfish". Maybe I don't get your meaning.

 

Sorry, I don't need examples from somebody with learning difficulties.

 

Ok I think I know to what you are referring. Not very polite but I do know and I expect it.

If so I don't know what to say

I bet my IQ is still higher than you and I know my morals are better. It is in the genius level so I feel confident I undersatnd how things work in the wold.

 

Yes you are of the utmost highest character and IQ. Well done.

 

This is were you are fundamentaly wrong, given that you consider freedom of speech part of democracy, if you don't then you need to reevaluate your idea of democracy, My point being that your statement contradicts it's self, you can NOT preserve democracy my removing democratic right from others, even if you don't like what they are saying.

Claiming democratic rights are only for some, is not democracy.

 

Has it already been specified how anti hatespeech laws should be adjusted? Are the ones in existence completely unreasonable? If you see the point of current hatespeech laws in the USA, which seem to not infringe on free speech in a crazy unreasonable way and really aims to protect people from this nasty practice of hatemongering against people who did nothing to earn this except being a certain ethnicity... then how gets free speech limited and rights taken away in a dubious way? So, it depends on the details if improving them is a bad idea or not.
And yes, people being openly fascist (like a neonazi) by hate- and scaremongering against innocent people just trying to live their life remains worthy to convict. No, this does not mean they or any other person can't talk about controversial topics or display controversial opinions on them at all.
So the only people who have to worry about adequate functioning hatespeech laws are people who actually hate on folks because they belong to a particular ethnicity or political streaming, etc. etc. You can still flirt with fascism, ramble about ethnostates, glorify nazi actions in ww2 etc. or discuss controversial topics.
The thing with fascists and neonazis etc is many may not favor democracy (and yes, they have that right. No problemo), but they're lucky to be in one. In a less tolerant system there would be a lot more violence, and yups a lot of people hate fascists and neonazis with a passion... and for better reasons than these pieces of shit are hating on jews, blacks etc.

 

They're not particularly selfish. After all what he is arguing for is not primarily going to affect himself.
People express desires to improve society all the time. Even you. And you certainly have quaint perspectives on reality too... so what's really the issue with you where it comes to these topics?

 

Soldiers of Odin Declare Hunt for Rapists, Paedophiles Amid Finland Sex Attacks
is it hate speech to want to harm child rapists?... or because those rapists are muslims? . =/

 

I think there are already sufficient laws on the book to address hate speech gone too far. For example, harrassment laws for anyone who deliberately targets an individual with racial slurs, or public profanity laws, etc..or incitement to violence charges for anyone who escalates their hateful speech into hateful action.

I'm not sure what other limits you would want to impose, OP. Can you be more specific?

 

You should look into the general motives of these Soldiers of Odin. How do they regard muslims or immigration in general. Could it play a role in their concerns here?

 

Of course it plays a role.
Even in their lil video in the link Orison posted, they emphasize how half of the messages that these "nationalist" women (if they weren't talking about sex crimes in terms of a certain group, in this case immigrant, there wouldn't even be a need to say the word "nationalist") posing as underage girls received, came from Arabs in Finland.
The video seems to focus on "sex tourists invading their country", while the truth is that the majority of the perpetrators in all cases of sexual assault and rape are still Finnish natives.
So yeah, even though they briefly mention that their targets are all pedophiles, regardless of skin colour and religion, it's clear that that's not really the case.

And that just pertains to Orison's link.
There are plenty other stories about their members, founders, and activities.

 

Edit shmedit

 

Simple issue. I'm not you. You aren't me, you aren't the person standing next to, nor the 7 billion others in the world. Each person was genetically given their our individualism coded in their personal DNA they can't change. Therefore it is rediculous logic to believe that those 7 billion people will ever share the same life expectations as yourself.

I think it's sad that many of you seek positivity in a structured world that only enslaves your true self. Good luck with that. I think I'm going to continue being me.

 

How is what I said arguing against individualism and everyone being able to be their true self? I don't want you to be or think like me. You either read a message in my post there that isn’t there, or are thinking about something else and are mixing things up.
You display sympathy for intolerant assholes (fine with me), but then get your panties in a twist when a person displays intolerant thoughts and legit criticism about such folks. Something's off here.
So, we all have a right to be as we are/want to be, and think and express ourselves, but you take issue with anti-fascists because they're intolerant of fascistic principles and are afraid fascists and neonazis are gonna act upon their nasty convictions involving people they have a problem with (which is a legit concern). More so than with the intolerant people who argue for violently dealing with minorities just because they're part of a certain ethnicity or religion or because they think they shouldn't be here.

 

Because you argue for the right to conform differences. You're saying that one person is allowed to say one thing but another person can't say another. In this instance science actually works against the argument because our DNA and genome has all but pre determined how we are going to be when we grow up and we have little to no control over it. So how are we all meant to conform to this perfect little example of a human being perceived through your eyes?

 

It's as if you have a desire for everybody to be the same with one way of thinking and one way of life and that sounds like you might have to produce or replicate a very specific and similar DNA strand for all people. Well..... Somebody tried to do that once.

 

Where am i doing that? Quote me please. Everyone can say and think what they want. I have no issue with controversial mindsets or ideas being shared.
You're the one who has a problem with anti-fascists expressing themselves against people actively striving for discrimination and arguing for violence against people simply for being of a particular ethnicity or religion. If fascists and neonazis should be tolerated in our societies, even in expressing their ideas (until they cross the line with certain actions) why take issue with anti-fascists expressing their convictions?? They can't cross the line either without consequences.

 

Are you really talking about me?? Where did you took notice of this desire

 

I'm not actually arguing for anti fascists or fascists, I don't even have race in mind at all. I'm saying in general if we are all different then we are all going to have different opinions and we should all be allowed to talk about them freely.

Look, I know what you're saying and to an extent I agree with you, but the other part of me says well if exhibit A is allowed to talk freely about their religion, politics and general life ideology then so is exhibit B. Who am I to say, no you cannot say that because I don't agree? I'm nobody to say that. Exhibit B doesn't deserve it either. They're just living through pre determined outcomes and factors.

You've asked me before to research things and I have and now that I have a much clearer understanding of biology and genetics and the genome etc. Well, my understanding of it pushes me even more into thinking we have even less control than we initially thought and we aren't going to control it because nobody was ever wired up the same to pursue the same ideals. It's evident that's not what being human is about.