verneforchat

I don't think banning hate speech affects  intellectual diversity. Unless you want hate speech to prominently figure in intellectual diversity.
 
There is a difference in dissent of opinion, criticism; and speech inciting hate based on discrimination. Intellectualism does not increase based on discrimination, but on rational and logical dissent and freedom to criticize.
 
There is no place for hate speech, except in your inner mind dialogue.

Are you diagnosing an entire population of people with liberal beliefs to be not sane?
 
Did you get your armchair psychology degree from Trump University?
 
How about this? How about you post rational logical posts without calling people lunatic or insane? 

You have a very poor understanding of the 1st amendment.
"  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. "
 
Congress. Not liberals, Not republicans, not white supremacists, not green men, but Congress.

I would reserve the armchair psychiatric diagnosis for now.
 
Yelling is not a cardinal symptom for mentally unstable disorders in the DSM. 

Yelling chicks are so violent!
 
Muh 1st amendment!!!!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/02/06/president-trump-is-now-speculating-that-the-media-is-covering-up-terrorist-attacks/?tid=sm_tw&utm_term=.9b3f42cb2491
 
" “You’ve seen what happened in Paris, and Nice. All over Europe, it’s happening,” he said to the assembled military leaders. “It’s gotten to a point where it’s not even being reported. And in many cases the very, very dishonest press doesn’t want to report it. They have their reasons, and you understand that.” "
 
 
I cannot even. I just cannot.
Its been a little more than two weeks. And this man has created more entertainment than the entire Netflix lineup for maybe the next six months.

Yelling chicks are so violent!
 
Muh 1st amendment!!!!

what in the world
 
Like seriously #######.
 
If FEMA were so efficient, people in New Orleans would still not be bitchin about them.
 
I think I am going to skip the podcast. There is only so much stupidity I can tolerate in a day after reading Trump's tweets.
 

Cool. Burying in your head in the sand.
 
I would do the same if I posted and support the_donald 

FAKE NEWS!
 
It was a pink tutu.
 
#equality
#PINK

Correction- He is telling us the emperor wears no clothes when he watches Fox??
 
 

FAKE NEWS!
 
It was a pink tutu.
 
#equality
#PINK

"He identified one detail in the piece that rang false.
"I don't think the President wears a bathrobe, and definitely doesn't own one," he said."
 
 
Good ol spicer 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/02/06/president-trump-is-now-speculating-that-the-media-is-covering-up-terrorist-attacks/?tid=sm_tw&utm_term=.9b3f42cb2491
 
" “You’ve seen what happened in Paris, and Nice. All over Europe, it’s happening,” he said to the assembled military leaders. “It’s gotten to a point where it’s not even being reported. And in many cases the very, very dishonest press doesn’t want to report it. They have their reasons, and you understand that.” "
 
 
I cannot even. I just cannot.
Its been a little more than two weeks. And this man has created more entertainment than the entire Netflix lineup for maybe the next six months.

You keep misunderstanding the 1st amendment. Here it is again in English:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
 
Sorry I don't have a Ukranian/Russian version, perhaps it may help you understand it better?

Dissent, criticism and inciting hate are three different things.
Scrutinizing a religion, or some points of the religion is not hate speech. Asking people to hate people of a particular religion is hate speech.
 
Its like comparing apples to oranges. 
 
 
For example, is it "hate" if an art student draws Mohammed for an art project? No one terms this hate except extremists. Who then incite violence based on it. 
Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the idea of cultural appropriation? This is dissent or disagreement, not hate. 
Is it "hate" if a speaker argues against Black Lives Matter? Again dissent or disagreement, not hate. If the propagate and influence their students to hate on BLM or blacks purely on the basis of their race, that is hate.
Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the notion of a gender wage gap? Again dissent or disagreement, not hate. If they can explain why they object in a rational manner, without resorting to saying 'but WIMEN' then i would still say it is slightly sexist, but still not hate speech.
 
If I, as a liberal, can understand the difference between dissent, criticism and actual hate speech, why do so wrongly believe that other liberals cannot? Or if conservatives cannot?
 
Why are you so hellbent on proving that all liberals or the left HATE anyone who disagrees with what we believe in? Hate is a very strong word.

I don't think banning hate speech affects  intellectual diversity. Unless you want hate speech to prominently figure in intellectual diversity.
 
There is a difference in dissent of opinion, criticism; and speech inciting hate based on discrimination. Intellectualism does not increase based on discrimination, but on rational and logical dissent and freedom to criticize.
 
There is no place for hate speech, except in your inner mind dialogue.

Dissent, criticism and inciting hate are three different things.
Scrutinizing a religion, or some points of the religion is not hate speech. Asking people to hate people of a particular religion is hate speech.
 
Its like comparing apples to oranges. 
 
 
For example, is it "hate" if an art student draws Mohammed for an art project? No one terms this hate except extremists. Who then incite violence based on it. 
Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the idea of cultural appropriation? This is dissent or disagreement, not hate. 
Is it "hate" if a speaker argues against Black Lives Matter? Again dissent or disagreement, not hate. If the propagate and influence their students to hate on BLM or blacks purely on the basis of their race, that is hate.
Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the notion of a gender wage gap? Again dissent or disagreement, not hate. If they can explain why they object in a rational manner, without resorting to saying 'but WIMEN' then i would still say it is slightly sexist, but still not hate speech.
 
If I, as a liberal, can understand the difference between dissent, criticism and actual hate speech, why do so wrongly believe that other liberals cannot? Or if conservatives cannot?
 
Why are you so hellbent on proving that all liberals or the left HATE anyone who disagrees with what we believe in? Hate is a very strong word.

Dissent, criticism and inciting hate are three different things.
Scrutinizing a religion, or some points of the religion is not hate speech. Asking people to hate people of a particular religion is hate speech.
 
Its like comparing apples to oranges. 
 
 
For example, is it "hate" if an art student draws Mohammed for an art project? No one terms this hate except extremists. Who then incite violence based on it. 
Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the idea of cultural appropriation? This is dissent or disagreement, not hate. 
Is it "hate" if a speaker argues against Black Lives Matter? Again dissent or disagreement, not hate. If the propagate and influence their students to hate on BLM or blacks purely on the basis of their race, that is hate.
Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the notion of a gender wage gap? Again dissent or disagreement, not hate. If they can explain why they object in a rational manner, without resorting to saying 'but WIMEN' then i would still say it is slightly sexist, but still not hate speech.
 
If I, as a liberal, can understand the difference between dissent, criticism and actual hate speech, why do so wrongly believe that other liberals cannot? Or if conservatives cannot?
 
Why are you so hellbent on proving that all liberals or the left HATE anyone who disagrees with what we believe in? Hate is a very strong word.

You make a valid point. Regarding the quantifying of hate speech, not the links. Those links are terrible.
 
How do we quantify hate speech.
 
But that is the key thing. We don't need to allow hate speech, we may need to quantify hate speech better to term it as hate speech or not?
But we can all agree that discriminating and inciting hate based on color, religion, nationality and ethnicity is hate speech no matter how its thinly veiled?

I don't think banning hate speech affects  intellectual diversity. Unless you want hate speech to prominently figure in intellectual diversity.
 
There is a difference in dissent of opinion, criticism; and speech inciting hate based on discrimination. Intellectualism does not increase based on discrimination, but on rational and logical dissent and freedom to criticize.
 
There is no place for hate speech, except in your inner mind dialogue.

You have a very poor understanding of the 1st amendment.
"  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. "
 
Congress. Not liberals, Not republicans, not white supremacists, not green men, but Congress.

these 'zones' started more as a way to keep the majority from harassing women, gays and racial minorities, etc. they're not new and colleges haven't suddenly, upon the appearance of millennials, started crafting these rules to appease liberals. lets get that straight first.
 
no, you do not get to scrutinize an individual's gender. and no, you do not get to scrutinize an individual's religion. that is, harassment. not sure why you think that's ok.
 
well first, i think you need to focus on if you're speaking about a non affiliated guest speaker or a student or a professor. then focus on the setting, is it a class? a rally? a paid speaking engagement?
 
seems like you want a black and white response, very cut and dry. that just isn't ever going to happen in a country of 308 million differing opinions. that's why protest is so important, so we have a means to shut people up who are full of it.
 

Dissent, criticism and inciting hate are three different things.
Scrutinizing a religion, or some points of the religion is not hate speech. Asking people to hate people of a particular religion is hate speech.
 
Its like comparing apples to oranges. 
 
 
For example, is it "hate" if an art student draws Mohammed for an art project? No one terms this hate except extremists. Who then incite violence based on it. 
Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the idea of cultural appropriation? This is dissent or disagreement, not hate. 
Is it "hate" if a speaker argues against Black Lives Matter? Again dissent or disagreement, not hate. If the propagate and influence their students to hate on BLM or blacks purely on the basis of their race, that is hate.
Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the notion of a gender wage gap? Again dissent or disagreement, not hate. If they can explain why they object in a rational manner, without resorting to saying 'but WIMEN' then i would still say it is slightly sexist, but still not hate speech.
 
If I, as a liberal, can understand the difference between dissent, criticism and actual hate speech, why do so wrongly believe that other liberals cannot? Or if conservatives cannot?
 
Why are you so hellbent on proving that all liberals or the left HATE anyone who disagrees with what we believe in? Hate is a very strong word.