Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
GotZoom said:Let's look at the infamous "N" word.
Whites use it - hate speech. We aren't "allowed" to use it.
Black use it - it's cool...they are allowed.
If the word is offensive, it is offensive.
It doesn't matter whose mouth it comes out of.
I have yet to see a white person get offended because they are called a "cracker" - but let a white person say, "you people", or anything else that can be even remotely associated with discimination, and listen to the uproar.
GotZoom said:So if a black guy calls me a cracker, and I punch him, it is now hatespeech?
The line isn't drawn because people get hurt. The line gets drawn because certain people make an issue of it, and others don't stand up to those people.
The ClayTaurus said:It's because the word has a different meaning based on who's saying it. I've been called the N bomb before, and I'm white. It's just like dude or bro or similar.
The ClayTaurus said:Cracker is hatespeech.
The ClayTaurus said:Amigo isn't hate speech. And your second paragraph couples well with my original post. If there is no two extreme ends to something, then the argument is about where to draw the line... what constitutes reasonable manner. To me, hatespeech is much worse then soft porn because it incites violence. So to me, the line looks like, for porn, it is drawn in an area where no one is being hurt. No one dies after seeing someone's rack. Victoria's secret commercials don't cause someone to get punched in the face. But then, with hatespeech, the line is drawn in the area where people do get hurt. If you call someone the n bomb you'll get punched.
This was my entire point of slippery slopes. We have to go back to banning soft porn because it leads to hard core porn which leads to this which leads to that. Why can't the line be drawn at hard porn? Why can't the line be before hatespeech? There seems to just be a lack of consistency.
ScreamingEagle said:The libs think "amigos" is hate speech.
Why NOT ban all forms of pornography? (With certain limited exceptions - there's always exceptions to every rule.)
It seems our culture is way out of whack right now...we need to do something to clean up our act.
I also disagree with you - as I think porn has already caused more suffering than today's so-called "hatespeech" could ever claim.
The ClayTaurus said:Well then, I suppose we disagree. I think good parenting would alleviate any "problems" caused by porn. In fact, I think parenting skills are the root of many problems in this country, and that should be addressed first and foremost.
And I don't think all porn should be banned because I certainly see no problem with porn in a private bedroom between two consenting adults.
ScreamingEagle said:I think porn has already caused more suffering than today's so-called "hatespeech" could ever claim.
The ClayTaurus said:Well then, I suppose we disagree. I think good parenting would alleviate any "problems" caused by porn. In fact, I think parenting skills are the root of many problems in this country, and that should be addressed first and foremost.
And I don't think all porn should be banned because I certainly see no problem with porn in a private bedroom between two consenting adults.
Originally posted by CivilLiberty
Absurd - how do you find the basis for this belief?
GotZoom said:Ohhh..ok....
So if I walk out of my office and pass a black guy on the street and greet him with ...
"hey..wazzup my N...."
nothing will happen to me right?
ScreamingEagle said:One of the parenting skills that should be addressed first and foremost is the skill of pushing politicians to enact laws that will clean up the various forms of media that fill our childrens' minds full of pornography and rubbish. There is no other way to really protect today's children from this as it is everywhere. How can a child be formed into a good person when he/she is bombarded with sleeze all the time? It corrupts.
Just take a good look around you.
The ClayTaurus said:No, plenty will happen to you. You can't call a black person the n bomb because of the historical connotation.
Look I get the point, it's not fair that they can say it but we can't.
The N bomb has two different meanings, one if you're black, and one if you're white. It's the same in every race. You can't use epithets to another group, but they will always be used freely within that group, usually out of sarcasm.
The ClayTaurus said:Does war corrupt? How do you explain war to a child? There will always be corruptive forces in this world, the job is not to ban them all but to learn how to ignore them. Self control. The government does need to think and parent for you.
The ClayTaurus said:No, plenty will happen to you. You can't call a black person the n bomb because of the historical connotation.
Look I get the point, it's not fair that they can say it but we can't.
The ClayTaurus said:No, plenty will happen to you. You can't call a black person the n bomb because of the historical connotation.
Look I get the point, it's not fair that they can say it but we can't.
The N bomb has two different meanings, one if you're black, and one if you're white. It's the same in every race. You can't use epithets to another group, but they will always be used freely within that group, usually out of sarcasm.
Max Power said:Yeah, a white person can call a black person a ****** and there's nothing he can (legally) do about it.
ScreamingEagle said:I suppose you will support mind control next?
ScreamingEagle said:You explain war to a child by telling them the truth. America does not go to war lightly. We have good reasons. Tell them those reasons.
Max Power said:Yeah, a white person can call a black person a ****** and there's nothing he can (legally) do about it.
