1847

Trump is such an idiot. He’s attacking the first amendment! This is a worse loser than taking on the second amendment, by far.

The good news is that his bullshit is seriously not working. People just aren’t buying it, and the more desperate and crazy he gets, the worse it’s going to get for him.

So far, my faith in humanity is being confirmed.

1848

You are an optimist. The fact that Trump is where he is confirms my lack of faith in humanity.

1849

Only it really isn’t. Most 2nd Amendment people give a flying fuck about the first. Hell most conservatives AND liberals give a flying fuck about it. Both are willing, eager even, to take away 1st Amendment rights from people that they disagree with.

We see examples of it in these forums fairly frequently and we’re fairly middle of the road. Out in the real world it’s fairly commonplace.

Edit: Still the irony of Trump complaining that people can lie is pretty great. I mean if the media couldn’t lie, than the entire world would have to keep calling him out non-stop. 1st Amendment lets him hide in a hole with Hannity and pretend everything they’re saying isn’t pulled out of their asses.

1850

I would call that a small fraction of humanity.

1851

The 1st amendment isn’t about accepting everything a person says, it’s simply about the right to say it in the first place. Forums can’t violate it, even with strict moderation rules, but especially by the actions of members who argue against views they disagree with.

1852

Yes… but that isn’t what I’m talking about. I’m talking about people who want to charge people with crimes for saying things they disagree with, which happens every day in the real world.

1853

Maybe it should be “lack of faith in Americans.”

Clinton is only +7 in polling aggregates at the moment, and there’s still alot of time to go.

1854

1855

Clever cat, it is not even a foreign breed, so perhaps there is hope for their human brethren!

1856

Trump has upended our politics. But he turns out to be the guy you would pray not to sit next to at dinner. He’s the one who never asks you a question, talks endlessly about himself — and has nothing to say. He doesn’t read, has no original ideas and thinks he knows more than you do because he once heard something on the news. If you were at a bar and saw him walking in, you’d look the other way, hoping not to catch his eye.

1857

Hahahahaha. Trump now calling for investigation of Clinton’s ties to Putin

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/clintons-close-ties-to-putin-deserve-scrutiny

I’m guessing it’s deflection so his supporters can say “Clinton does it too!”

1858

I don’t see a lot of people on either side trying to send people to prison for saying something they shouldn’t. Freedom of Speech does not mean freedom from consequences. And we’ve already talked, many times how the freedom isn’t absolute… do we need to go over yelling Fire in a crowded theater… again.

1859

Sure there are… many objections about so called hate-speech are essentially arguments against where the boundary of free speech is.

The reason why yelling fire in a theater isn’t protected speech, is not simply because it is potentially harmful to others, but because it does not constitute an expression of opinion. This is the critical element of speech which makes it worthy of protection.

Expressing terrible opinions is, and always must, be protected. Because virtually all society progress has roots in such “terrible opinions” which offended the majority of the country. You simply cannot be certain that your opinions of the value of a given position is indeed based upon some ultimate universal truth, or whether it is simply a product of habit. And as such, all opinions, even those which seem reprehensible, must be protected. Because it’s only through open discourse of ideas does our society separate the wheat from the chaff and become stronger.

You cannot lies as fact, and statements which do not constitute an expression of opinion or political will are not considered protected. Beyond that, people need to be able to say whatever they want, even if those statements are grossly offensive.

1860

Katrina Pierson says she accidentally said Afghanistan when she meant Syria, because her headset wasn’t working.

1861

It is protected. That doesn’t mean you get to harass people on twitter or some other private site. That’s the key here… private. if you want to quit your job, walking down to some public avenue and spout nonsense and hate, go ahead. You’re not going to be arrested for that. You might lose your job, if you haven’t quit it so you can spend hours being angry, and you might not; that would be up to your employer. You don’t have a right to say whatever you want on whatever media you want because some of those forums are private. They have a right to say no to you. They have a right to moderate.

1862

That’s fine, I don’t think anyone is talking about private sites. Shiva wasn’t actually saying that these forums over moderate anything, but rather that we see people expressing the opinion that certain expressions of opinion really should be shut down and not allowed.

And he’s right. I think it’s common that people who claim to value freedom of speech, on both sides of the Aisle, really only value freedom of people to agree with them.

1863

Yeah. I don’t think any member on this site should be able to chase me around in various topics, and in private messages calling me a n*gger and to go back to Africa. Do you think they should be able to do that here?

1864

I think Timex is more referring to people like me, who’ve gone on record on the boards as saying that certain kinds of thought/expression are more or less incompatible with modern, progressive society, and who wouldn’t at all be put out to see a bit of legal heft applied to that notion.

That is to say, he’s not talking about behavior on these boards, but rather political theories espoused on these boards about broader society. Like mine saying that the Brits/Germans probably have a better/more functional view of “freedom” of speech than the US does.

edit: not to speak for Timex, who is a big boy and can explain himself fantastically well for a clearly crazy-person whose beliefs differ from my own significantly ;)

1865

Well that’d be up to Tom, but Armando clarified what I was saying pretty well.

ALSO SHUT UP ARMANDO, OR YOU WILL BE SENT TO THE CAMPS.

1866

Got it.

But if it’s up to Tom to decide whether or not harassment is okay on his board or not, why isn’t up to Tom to decide whether or not someone fits with the community he wants here. How are you drawing your line? Like where does this is my political line and ideology separate from being just racism and hate that’s hostile to other members?