Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
If you want to call private property "public accomodation" go right ahead, Karl.that doesnt debunk my claim,,,Why? Thats just some bullshit the tyrants created to justify their intervention into the private sector.youre gonna have to do better than that,,Keep repeating that totalitarian rhetoric, mr.constitutionmy house is private property,, facebook is open to the public my house isnt,,Whats the differencefacebook isnt private property,, its a public accommodation,,,It wasn't against the law for CITIZENS (key word) to not want to conduct their private property as they see fit.You don't like that the law that bans bakeries from discriminating against a group of citizens? What part of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution don't you get? And no...banning Rump isn't discrimination. Look up the term.Yeah, how dare a private firm decide what's in their best interest. Private enterprise...bah humbug.Good, this will hurt Facebook. Im surprised they were dumb enough to do it, but you lefties are as dumb as they get.They announced it this morning. trump can't go back to Facebook.
They have the right to decide who can be on their site. trump violated the rules over and over again. He made very bad choices so he should take personal responsibility, bad consequences comes with bad choices. He should have been taught that as a child.
I guess that doesn't apply to bakeries though if they happen to be Christian. And I never knew a business where it was "in their interest" to ban millions of accounts from speaking an opinion in a free society-- -- -- especially one that not one of them can prove is wrong.
Right-wingers are so funny. They scream night and day that they love the Constitution and the laws of the land until it goes against them! LOL
In fact, PA laws trample on several constitutional rights for CITIZENS (again, key word)
Do you understand now?
And here you are regurgitating it.
Mr. Constitution
when did I say that??well corps. are a creation of government,,Public accommodations. ie a horseshit excuse for government intervention.my house is private property,, facebook is open to the public my house isnt,,Whats the differencefacebook isnt private property,, its a public accommodation,,,It wasn't against the law for CITIZENS (key word) to not want to conduct their private property as they see fit.You don't like that the law that bans bakeries from discriminating against a group of citizens? What part of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution don't you get? And no...banning Rump isn't discrimination. Look up the term.Yeah, how dare a private firm decide what's in their best interest. Private enterprise...bah humbug.Good, this will hurt Facebook. Im surprised they were dumb enough to do it, but you lefties are as dumb as they get.They announced it this morning. trump can't go back to Facebook.
They have the right to decide who can be on their site. trump violated the rules over and over again. He made very bad choices so he should take personal responsibility, bad consequences comes with bad choices. He should have been taught that as a child.
I guess that doesn't apply to bakeries though if they happen to be Christian. And I never knew a business where it was "in their interest" to ban millions of accounts from speaking an opinion in a free society-- -- -- especially one that not one of them can prove is wrong.
Right-wingers are so funny. They scream night and day that they love the Constitution and the laws of the land until it goes against them! LOL
In fact, PA laws trample on several constitutional rights for CITIZENS (again, key word)
Do you understand now?
Yes, yes. "You didn't build that". We all owe our left nut to the government. Sorry, no.
are you saying FB isnt open to the public or that my house is??If you want to call private property "public accomodation" go right ahead, Karl.that doesnt debunk my claim,,,Why? Thats just some bullshit the tyrants created to justify their intervention into the private sector.youre gonna have to do better than that,,Keep repeating that totalitarian rhetoric, mr.constitutionmy house is private property,, facebook is open to the public my house isnt,,Whats the differencefacebook isnt private property,, its a public accommodation,,,It wasn't against the law for CITIZENS (key word) to not want to conduct their private property as they see fit.You don't like that the law that bans bakeries from discriminating against a group of citizens? What part of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution don't you get? And no...banning Rump isn't discrimination. Look up the term.Yeah, how dare a private firm decide what's in their best interest. Private enterprise...bah humbug.Good, this will hurt Facebook. Im surprised they were dumb enough to do it, but you lefties are as dumb as they get.They announced it this morning. trump can't go back to Facebook.
They have the right to decide who can be on their site. trump violated the rules over and over again. He made very bad choices so he should take personal responsibility, bad consequences comes with bad choices. He should have been taught that as a child.
I guess that doesn't apply to bakeries though if they happen to be Christian. And I never knew a business where it was "in their interest" to ban millions of accounts from speaking an opinion in a free society-- -- -- especially one that not one of them can prove is wrong.
Right-wingers are so funny. They scream night and day that they love the Constitution and the laws of the land until it goes against them! LOL
In fact, PA laws trample on several constitutional rights for CITIZENS (again, key word)
Do you understand now?
And here you are regurgitating it.
Mr. Constitution
You don't like that the law that bans bakeries from discriminating against a group of citizens?
You're parroting the same excuses liberals use when they try to justify government intervention. If you don't like the corporate charter, we can talk. That can be changed. But for fuck's sake don't use it as an excuse for Big Brother.when did I say that??well corps. are a creation of government,,Public accommodations. ie a horseshit excuse for government intervention.my house is private property,, facebook is open to the public my house isnt,,Whats the differencefacebook isnt private property,, its a public accommodation,,,It wasn't against the law for CITIZENS (key word) to not want to conduct their private property as they see fit.You don't like that the law that bans bakeries from discriminating against a group of citizens? What part of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution don't you get? And no...banning Rump isn't discrimination. Look up the term.Yeah, how dare a private firm decide what's in their best interest. Private enterprise...bah humbug.Good, this will hurt Facebook. Im surprised they were dumb enough to do it, but you lefties are as dumb as they get.They announced it this morning. trump can't go back to Facebook.
They have the right to decide who can be on their site. trump violated the rules over and over again. He made very bad choices so he should take personal responsibility, bad consequences comes with bad choices. He should have been taught that as a child.
I guess that doesn't apply to bakeries though if they happen to be Christian. And I never knew a business where it was "in their interest" to ban millions of accounts from speaking an opinion in a free society-- -- -- especially one that not one of them can prove is wrong.
Right-wingers are so funny. They scream night and day that they love the Constitution and the laws of the land until it goes against them! LOL
In fact, PA laws trample on several constitutional rights for CITIZENS (again, key word)
Do you understand now?
Yes, yes. "You didn't build that". We all owe our left nut to the government. Sorry, no.
when you sign a contract with the government there are strings attached,,
thats why I like the free market system better and have worked in it for 30 yrs,,
The Supreme Court & the Constitution disagrees. You don't like it? Leave and move to Russia.You don't like that the law that bans bakeries from discriminating against a group of citizens?
You can't "discriminate" against any group of citizens by simply upholding your own religion, the largest and oldest and most widely practiced on the planet, by simply asking them to take their business down the street to one of the other 150 bakeries on the block and to respect YOUR right to your beliefs.
are you saying FB isnt open to the public or that my house is??If you want to call private property "public accomodation" go right ahead, Karl.that doesnt debunk my claim,,,Why? Thats just some bullshit the tyrants created to justify their intervention into the private sector.youre gonna have to do better than that,,Keep repeating that totalitarian rhetoric, mr.constitutionmy house is private property,, facebook is open to the public my house isnt,,Whats the differencefacebook isnt private property,, its a public accommodation,,,It wasn't against the law for CITIZENS (key word) to not want to conduct their private property as they see fit.You don't like that the law that bans bakeries from discriminating against a group of citizens? What part of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution don't you get? And no...banning Rump isn't discrimination. Look up the term.Yeah, how dare a private firm decide what's in their best interest. Private enterprise...bah humbug.Good, this will hurt Facebook. Im surprised they were dumb enough to do it, but you lefties are as dumb as they get.They announced it this morning. trump can't go back to Facebook.
They have the right to decide who can be on their site. trump violated the rules over and over again. He made very bad choices so he should take personal responsibility, bad consequences comes with bad choices. He should have been taught that as a child.
I guess that doesn't apply to bakeries though if they happen to be Christian. And I never knew a business where it was "in their interest" to ban millions of accounts from speaking an opinion in a free society-- -- -- especially one that not one of them can prove is wrong.
Right-wingers are so funny. They scream night and day that they love the Constitution and the laws of the land until it goes against them! LOL
In fact, PA laws trample on several constitutional rights for CITIZENS (again, key word)
Do you understand now?
And here you are regurgitating it.
Mr. Constitution
I'd rather not have government intervention,, if FB would say they dont allow conservative POV then I would be fine with it,, but even their own people said they violated their own rules in banning trump,,You're parroting the same excuses liberals use when they try to justify government intervention. If you don't like the corporate charter, we can talk. That can be changed. But for fuck's sake don't use it as an excuse for Big Brother.when did I say that??well corps. are a creation of government,,Public accommodations. ie a horseshit excuse for government intervention.my house is private property,, facebook is open to the public my house isnt,,Whats the differencefacebook isnt private property,, its a public accommodation,,,It wasn't against the law for CITIZENS (key word) to not want to conduct their private property as they see fit.You don't like that the law that bans bakeries from discriminating against a group of citizens? What part of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution don't you get? And no...banning Rump isn't discrimination. Look up the term.Yeah, how dare a private firm decide what's in their best interest. Private enterprise...bah humbug.Good, this will hurt Facebook. Im surprised they were dumb enough to do it, but you lefties are as dumb as they get.They announced it this morning. trump can't go back to Facebook.
They have the right to decide who can be on their site. trump violated the rules over and over again. He made very bad choices so he should take personal responsibility, bad consequences comes with bad choices. He should have been taught that as a child.
I guess that doesn't apply to bakeries though if they happen to be Christian. And I never knew a business where it was "in their interest" to ban millions of accounts from speaking an opinion in a free society-- -- -- especially one that not one of them can prove is wrong.
Right-wingers are so funny. They scream night and day that they love the Constitution and the laws of the land until it goes against them! LOL
In fact, PA laws trample on several constitutional rights for CITIZENS (again, key word)
Do you understand now?
Yes, yes. "You didn't build that". We all owe our left nut to the government. Sorry, no.
when you sign a contract with the government there are strings attached,,
thats why I like the free market system better and have worked in it for 30 yrs,,
who gave up their rights??are you saying FB isnt open to the public or that my house is??If you want to call private property "public accomodation" go right ahead, Karl.that doesnt debunk my claim,,,Why? Thats just some bullshit the tyrants created to justify their intervention into the private sector.youre gonna have to do better than that,,Keep repeating that totalitarian rhetoric, mr.constitutionmy house is private property,, facebook is open to the public my house isnt,,Whats the differencefacebook isnt private property,, its a public accommodation,,,It wasn't against the law for CITIZENS (key word) to not want to conduct their private property as they see fit.You don't like that the law that bans bakeries from discriminating against a group of citizens? What part of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution don't you get? And no...banning Rump isn't discrimination. Look up the term.Yeah, how dare a private firm decide what's in their best interest. Private enterprise...bah humbug.Good, this will hurt Facebook. Im surprised they were dumb enough to do it, but you lefties are as dumb as they get.They announced it this morning. trump can't go back to Facebook.
They have the right to decide who can be on their site. trump violated the rules over and over again. He made very bad choices so he should take personal responsibility, bad consequences comes with bad choices. He should have been taught that as a child.
I guess that doesn't apply to bakeries though if they happen to be Christian. And I never knew a business where it was "in their interest" to ban millions of accounts from speaking an opinion in a free society-- -- -- especially one that not one of them can prove is wrong.
Right-wingers are so funny. They scream night and day that they love the Constitution and the laws of the land until it goes against them! LOL
In fact, PA laws trample on several constitutional rights for CITIZENS (again, key word)
Do you understand now?
And here you are regurgitating it.
Mr. Constitution
"Open to the public" is irrelevant. We don't give up our rights because we're "open to the public".
They're Trumpsters, not constitutionalists. Not conservatives. Mouth breathing populists who want to use government to bully others. Fuck them. Fuck them twice. Fuck them with rusty farm implements.I love watching "constitutionalists" expounding Marxism.
It makes me giggle.
Yes ....The independent Advisory Board has determined that Facebook's decision to ban Donald Trump was legit. However, it asked for more transparency and clearer rules, and said FB should not "indefinitely" suspend members without an established length of time.
The board announced Wednesday morning that Facebook needed to decide within six months how long Trump’s suspension would last, or if it would be permanent.
The Advisory Board is definitely not a rubber stamp, either. It suggested some changes many of us felt were in order for a long time:
The initial round of decisions — which touched on alleged hate speech, coronavirus misinformation and references to dangerous organizations — signaled that the board would demand greater clarity from Facebook about its policies, as well as transparency. Before Wednesday’s decision, the board had overturned Facebook’s decisions six times, upheld them twice, and was unable to complete a ruling once.
The Supreme Court & the Constitution disagrees. You don't like it? Leave and move to Russia.You don't like that the law that bans bakeries from discriminating against a group of citizens?
You can't "discriminate" against any group of citizens by simply upholding your own religion, the largest and oldest and most widely practiced on the planet, by simply asking them to take their business down the street to one of the other 150 bakeries on the block and to respect YOUR right to your beliefs.
Post 96I do not know. Please tell me how he tried to overthrow the govtYes, I did have to step away for awhile, but the reason I'm not answering TN is because (1) he knows the answer, and (2) I pretty much answered it already in postI was hoping OL just stepped away because I wrote a post in this thread and awaiting a reply as well. I guess real life includes other things than politics! I am going to have to sit down after that eye-opening revelation....;PSo you have nothing. Should have done what oldlady did and not respondedYes, because you want to waste my time, get some attention, and shit on something.ask you like i asked oldlady. How did he try to overthrow our constitutional republic?
As an outsider looking in who...has recently been calling people out more lol good grief but I enjoy it when it's well deserved...so human I am. So, to keep my err.. new quality going, Fort Fun...you are giving Fort Wayne a bad name...just wanted to mention that lol
Like i told Oldlady, the moment the GP takes control of congress, Facebook is fucked. Their political bias is impossible to cover up anymore and it will cost them, bigly.How will it hurt Facebook? Sounds like they will be a better place now.Good, this will hurt Facebook. Im surprised they were dumb enough to do it, but you lefties are as dumb as they get.They announced it this morning. trump can't go back to Facebook.
They have the right to decide who can be on their site. trump violated the rules over and over again. He made very bad choices so he should take personal responsibility, bad consequences comes with bad choices. He should have been taught that as a child.
They're allowed to be biased.
I will politely disagree. Miniscule example, but an example. As a kid I played softball. One game I clearly recall during the playoffs. Now, many claim girls sports should not matter to anyone, mostly because they don't think they are important imo. Anyway, it can be a big deal to some girls. So, this game turned into one of those things that are now filmed instantly from the crowd. The fans were loud and mostly yelling at the umpires. There were several bad calls by different umps, so one man who must have had absolutely no life other than his daughter's success playing softball went overboard in words and deeds. That guy had no business going ballistic, cussing the umps, getting on the field, and starting a fight-which he did. All I clearly remember about that guy was his size...I have him around 7 ft 300 lol when he was maybe normal height for a male just heavy set. Point is had that angry guy not been there, there would have been no chaos, no fist fights on the field (around 15 jumped in from both sides)-parents not the players, and mayhem commenced. Police were only 5 minutes away but it took that...over girls softball! There are people in this world who will act regardless of consequence. They just don't care, and I want to make them care one way or the other I guess. People like that only care about beating up on weaker people when they can and cry foul at any occasion.That exact concept: supporting free speech entails holding the door open for even the speech you personally disagree was hard for me to grasp a few years back. A KKK rally was going to be in an area where I had a trip planned. I squawked for days about how those losers would be there, almost enjoying my fury lol...well almost if it didn't involve such hate...but anyway..had someone point that out to me...point black "Hey, you say you support free speech so that means supporting the right of speech by all groups." The hard part is defining the line between free speech and hate speech. When exactly do words that contain fiery rhetoric turn into hateful rhetoric? That has yet to be ironed out obviously and maybe in another 10 to 20 years for the US, hard to measure.This could be the issue that will have the greatest impact on America's future. Trump is being rejected and is without a soapbox from which to peddle his lies.
A wise decision by Facebook in being able to separate hate speech from the right to free speech.
WH: Social Media Platforms Should Block More 'Untrustworthy Content'
The White House said President Joe Biden supported social media companies banning more content considered "untrustworthy" on their platforms.www.breitbart.com
supporting free speech is about speech you disagree with,,,
The real problem is during political rallies you'll often have at least a small group of haters...full to their gills in hate...varying age groups, and they know little else. They will show off and one-up the others in rhetoric, try to incite a fire or do some type of damage. Stepping onto the next step of hate speech is to actively encourage others to target the homes and families of their "opposition". That is crossing the line, although the defense will insist it was strictly a matter of expressing free speech and things maybe, got out of hand but that no hate crimes were commited. Venomous hate speech cannot be left unchecked. Really, it's pretty sad to think the US needs to decide in 2021 what should have been cut and dry decades ago...surely the 60's gave cause for defining the two in clear terms. Here we are 60 years later still trying to figure that out.
theres no such thing as hate speech,,
thats just speech you hated,,I will politely disagree. Miniscule example, but an example. As a kid I played softball. One game I clearly recall during the playoffs. Now, many claim girls sports should not matter to anyone, mostly because they don't think they are important imo. Anyway, it can be a big deal to some girls. So, this game turned into one of those things that are now filmed instantly from the crowd. The fans were loud and mostly yelling at the umpires. There wer bad calls, so one man who must have had absolutely no life other than his daughter's success playing softball went overboard in words and deeds. That guy had no business going ballistic, cussing the umps, getting on the field, and starting a fight-which he did. All I clearly remember about that guy was his size...I have him around 7 ft 280 lol when he was maybe normal height for a male just heavy set. Point is had that angry guy not been there, there would have been no chaos, no fist fights on the field (around 15 jumped in from both sides)-parents not the players, and mayhem commenced. Police were only 5 minutes away but it took that...over girls softball! There are people in this world who will act regardless of consequence. They just don't care, and I want to make them care one way or the other I guess. People like that only care about beating up on weaker people when they can and cry foul at any occasion.That exact concept: supporting free speech entails holding the door open for even the speech you personally disagree was hard for me to grasp a few years back. A KKK rally was going to be in an area where I had a trip planned. I squawked for days about how those losers would be there, almost enjoying my fury lol...well almost if it didn't involve such hate...but anyway..had someone point that out to me...point black "Hey, you say you support free speech so that means supporting the right of speech by all groups." The hard part is defining the line between free speech and hate speech. When exactly do words that contain fiery rhetoric turn into hateful rhetoric? That has yet to be ironed out obviously and maybe in another 10 to 20 years for the US, hard to measure.This could be the issue that will have the greatest impact on America's future. Trump is being rejected and is without a soapbox from which to peddle his lies.
A wise decision by Facebook in being able to separate hate speech from the right to free speech.WH: Social Media Platforms Should Block More 'Untrustworthy Content'
The White House said President Joe Biden supported social media companies banning more content considered "untrustworthy" on their platforms.
supporting free speech is about speech you disagree with,,,
The real problem is during political rallies you'll often have at least a small group of haters...full to their gills in hate...varying age groups, and they know little else. They will show off and one-up the others in rhetoric, try to incite a fire or do some type of damage. Stepping onto the next step of hate speech is to actively encourage others to target the homes and families of their "opposition". That is crossing the line, although the defense will insist it was strictly a matter of expressing free speech and things maybe, got out of hand but that no hate crimes were commited. Venomous hate speech cannot be left unchecked. Really, it's pretty sad to think the US needs to decide in 2021 what should have been cut and dry decades ago...surely the 60's gave cause for defining the two in clear terms. Here we are 60 years later still trying to figure that out.
theres no such thing as hate speech,,
Thats why I used quotations lolThey're Trumpsters, not constitutionalists. Not conservatives. Mouth breathing populists who want to use government to bully others. Fuck them. Fuck them twice. Fuck them with rusty farm implements.I love watching "constitutionalists" expounding Marxism.
It makes me giggle.
I hated his hate speech yesthats just speech you hated,,I will politely disagree. Miniscule example, but an example. As a kid I played softball. One game I clearly recall during the playoffs. Now, many claim girls sports should not matter to anyone, mostly because they don't think they are important imo. Anyway, it can be a big deal to some girls. So, this game turned into one of those things that are now filmed instantly from the crowd. The fans were loud and mostly yelling at the umpires. There wer bad calls, so one man who must have had absolutely no life other than his daughter's success playing softball went overboard in words and deeds. That guy had no business going ballistic, cussing the umps, getting on the field, and starting a fight-which he did. All I clearly remember about that guy was his size...I have him around 7 ft 280 lol when he was maybe normal height for a male just heavy set. Point is had that angry guy not been there, there would have been no chaos, no fist fights on the field (around 15 jumped in from both sides)-parents not the players, and mayhem commenced. Police were only 5 minutes away but it took that...over girls softball! There are people in this world who will act regardless of consequence. They just don't care, and I want to make them care one way or the other I guess. People like that only care about beating up on weaker people when they can and cry foul at any occasion.That exact concept: supporting free speech entails holding the door open for even the speech you personally disagree was hard for me to grasp a few years back. A KKK rally was going to be in an area where I had a trip planned. I squawked for days about how those losers would be there, almost enjoying my fury lol...well almost if it didn't involve such hate...but anyway..had someone point that out to me...point black "Hey, you say you support free speech so that means supporting the right of speech by all groups." The hard part is defining the line between free speech and hate speech. When exactly do words that contain fiery rhetoric turn into hateful rhetoric? That has yet to be ironed out obviously and maybe in another 10 to 20 years for the US, hard to measure.This could be the issue that will have the greatest impact on America's future. Trump is being rejected and is without a soapbox from which to peddle his lies.
A wise decision by Facebook in being able to separate hate speech from the right to free speech.WH: Social Media Platforms Should Block More 'Untrustworthy Content'
The White House said President Joe Biden supported social media companies banning more content considered "untrustworthy" on their platforms.
supporting free speech is about speech you disagree with,,,
The real problem is during political rallies you'll often have at least a small group of haters...full to their gills in hate...varying age groups, and they know little else. They will show off and one-up the others in rhetoric, try to incite a fire or do some type of damage. Stepping onto the next step of hate speech is to actively encourage others to target the homes and families of their "opposition". That is crossing the line, although the defense will insist it was strictly a matter of expressing free speech and things maybe, got out of hand but that no hate crimes were commited. Venomous hate speech cannot be left unchecked. Really, it's pretty sad to think the US needs to decide in 2021 what should have been cut and dry decades ago...surely the 60's gave cause for defining the two in clear terms. Here we are 60 years later still trying to figure that out.
theres no such thing as hate speech,,
according to your criteria thats hate speech,,,I hated his hate speech yesthats just speech you hated,,I will politely disagree. Miniscule example, but an example. As a kid I played softball. One game I clearly recall during the playoffs. Now, many claim girls sports should not matter to anyone, mostly because they don't think they are important imo. Anyway, it can be a big deal to some girls. So, this game turned into one of those things that are now filmed instantly from the crowd. The fans were loud and mostly yelling at the umpires. There wer bad calls, so one man who must have had absolutely no life other than his daughter's success playing softball went overboard in words and deeds. That guy had no business going ballistic, cussing the umps, getting on the field, and starting a fight-which he did. All I clearly remember about that guy was his size...I have him around 7 ft 280 lol when he was maybe normal height for a male just heavy set. Point is had that angry guy not been there, there would have been no chaos, no fist fights on the field (around 15 jumped in from both sides)-parents not the players, and mayhem commenced. Police were only 5 minutes away but it took that...over girls softball! There are people in this world who will act regardless of consequence. They just don't care, and I want to make them care one way or the other I guess. People like that only care about beating up on weaker people when they can and cry foul at any occasion.That exact concept: supporting free speech entails holding the door open for even the speech you personally disagree was hard for me to grasp a few years back. A KKK rally was going to be in an area where I had a trip planned. I squawked for days about how those losers would be there, almost enjoying my fury lol...well almost if it didn't involve such hate...but anyway..had someone point that out to me...point black "Hey, you say you support free speech so that means supporting the right of speech by all groups." The hard part is defining the line between free speech and hate speech. When exactly do words that contain fiery rhetoric turn into hateful rhetoric? That has yet to be ironed out obviously and maybe in another 10 to 20 years for the US, hard to measure.This could be the issue that will have the greatest impact on America's future. Trump is being rejected and is without a soapbox from which to peddle his lies.
A wise decision by Facebook in being able to separate hate speech from the right to free speech.WH: Social Media Platforms Should Block More 'Untrustworthy Content'
The White House said President Joe Biden supported social media companies banning more content considered "untrustworthy" on their platforms.
supporting free speech is about speech you disagree with,,,
The real problem is during political rallies you'll often have at least a small group of haters...full to their gills in hate...varying age groups, and they know little else. They will show off and one-up the others in rhetoric, try to incite a fire or do some type of damage. Stepping onto the next step of hate speech is to actively encourage others to target the homes and families of their "opposition". That is crossing the line, although the defense will insist it was strictly a matter of expressing free speech and things maybe, got out of hand but that no hate crimes were commited. Venomous hate speech cannot be left unchecked. Really, it's pretty sad to think the US needs to decide in 2021 what should have been cut and dry decades ago...surely the 60's gave cause for defining the two in clear terms. Here we are 60 years later still trying to figure that out.
theres no such thing as hate speech,,
Either I'm not following you or we just have a different take. To be fair to my younger self, my capability for hate speech was minimal...although I was pretty good about stomping up the stairs on occasion at home as a typical teen ha.according to your criteria thats hate speech,,,I hated his hate speech yesthats just speech you hated,,I will politely disagree. Miniscule example, but an example. As a kid I played softball. One game I clearly recall during the playoffs. Now, many claim girls sports should not matter to anyone, mostly because they don't think they are important imo. Anyway, it can be a big deal to some girls. So, this game turned into one of those things that are now filmed instantly from the crowd. The fans were loud and mostly yelling at the umpires. There wer bad calls, so one man who must have had absolutely no life other than his daughter's success playing softball went overboard in words and deeds. That guy had no business going ballistic, cussing the umps, getting on the field, and starting a fight-which he did. All I clearly remember about that guy was his size...I have him around 7 ft 280 lol when he was maybe normal height for a male just heavy set. Point is had that angry guy not been there, there would have been no chaos, no fist fights on the field (around 15 jumped in from both sides)-parents not the players, and mayhem commenced. Police were only 5 minutes away but it took that...over girls softball! There are people in this world who will act regardless of consequence. They just don't care, and I want to make them care one way or the other I guess. People like that only care about beating up on weaker people when they can and cry foul at any occasion.That exact concept: supporting free speech entails holding the door open for even the speech you personally disagree was hard for me to grasp a few years back. A KKK rally was going to be in an area where I had a trip planned. I squawked for days about how those losers would be there, almost enjoying my fury lol...well almost if it didn't involve such hate...but anyway..had someone point that out to me...point black "Hey, you say you support free speech so that means supporting the right of speech by all groups." The hard part is defining the line between free speech and hate speech. When exactly do words that contain fiery rhetoric turn into hateful rhetoric? That has yet to be ironed out obviously and maybe in another 10 to 20 years for the US, hard to measure.This could be the issue that will have the greatest impact on America's future. Trump is being rejected and is without a soapbox from which to peddle his lies.
A wise decision by Facebook in being able to separate hate speech from the right to free speech.WH: Social Media Platforms Should Block More 'Untrustworthy Content'
The White House said President Joe Biden supported social media companies banning more content considered "untrustworthy" on their platforms.
supporting free speech is about speech you disagree with,,,
The real problem is during political rallies you'll often have at least a small group of haters...full to their gills in hate...varying age groups, and they know little else. They will show off and one-up the others in rhetoric, try to incite a fire or do some type of damage. Stepping onto the next step of hate speech is to actively encourage others to target the homes and families of their "opposition". That is crossing the line, although the defense will insist it was strictly a matter of expressing free speech and things maybe, got out of hand but that no hate crimes were commited. Venomous hate speech cannot be left unchecked. Really, it's pretty sad to think the US needs to decide in 2021 what should have been cut and dry decades ago...surely the 60's gave cause for defining the two in clear terms. Here we are 60 years later still trying to figure that out.
theres no such thing as hate speech,,
