| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
Both ways, in fact. I don't understand how somebody gets so riled up about some retards insulting "your religion" that you actually grab a gun and go out there shooting people. On the other hand, i don't understand people who think it's smart to have basically the most provocating, spiteful and insulting "exhibition/contest" i've ever heard off. Which serves absolutely no other purpose than to insult a certain religion, no matter what way one tries to spin it. 'murica, i guess. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
I am sure if I looked hard enough I would find something this stupid from 20-50 years ago, but that only means we haven't gotten any better. | ||
|
heliusx
United States2306 Posts
| ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On May 04 2015 14:31 ticklishmusic wrote: Basically "I called his dead mom a bunch of bad names and he punched me in the face, people who love their moms are terrible violent people". The hell? You can love your mom all you want, it's using physical violence which is reprehensible and illegal, regardless of the original offense. Yes, people who go shoot other people for insulting their religion are terrible, violent people. Is this supposed to be up for debate now? | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
|
heliusx
United States2306 Posts
On May 05 2015 00:29 Nyxisto wrote: I don't think this "sticks and stone will break my bones.." mentality makes a lot of sense. People can literally be bullied to insanity by words alone, no violence needed. Words can be at least as harmful as physical violence, we're intellectual beings, not cows. That's not supposed to be an excuse for terrorism but if someone insults your dead mother he pretty much deserves a punch in the face. You're a sick person. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
For acknowledging that it doesn't make much sense to define a human being's rights solely by terms of physical health, like a farm animal? Stripping someone of their dignity can be much worse than causing them physical harm. There's a reason a lot of countries punish hate speech, racist statements or propaganda. Attacking people verbally at the core of what they are can just be as devastating a a punch to the face. | ||
|
BallinWitStalin
1177 Posts
On May 05 2015 00:29 Nyxisto wrote: I don't think this "sticks and stone will break my bones.." mentality makes a lot of sense. People can literally be bullied to insanity by words alone, no violence needed. Words can be at least as harmful as physical violence, we're intellectual beings, not cows. That's not supposed to be an excuse for terrorism but if someone insults your dead mother he pretty much deserves a punch in the face. Not sure I agree with this. The guys who shot at the cartoonists are definitely in the moral wrong. It doesn't matter what somebody says, does, or draws, if they aren't threatening your safety or life you don't get to shoot at them. Honestly, there's a grey area in there for physical altercation depending on the level of harassment, but I'm pretty much talking about a bar-fight level of violence here. That being said, the guys drawing those cartoons are just generally a bunch of childish asshats. They aren't "heroes" fighting for freedom of expression, they're just a bunch of high-school level bullies attempting to provoke and insult easy victims (Muslims in America and Europe right now are generally pretty consequence-free bully victims|) to get a reaction. It's a good thing that most of their victims are adult enough to tend to ignore their generally childish actions. It's a strange and dysfunctional adult that gets their kicks from attempting to hurt other people, either mentally or physically. The desire to do harm to another being is a strange desire that I will personally never understand. But they don't deserve to get shot. The guys doing the shooting are even bigger, crazier, more dysfunctional cunts. Fuck those guys. | ||
|
Yoav
United States1874 Posts
On May 05 2015 00:43 Nyxisto wrote:There's a reason a lot of countries punish hate speech, racist statements or propaganda. Attacking people verbally at the core of what they are can just be as devastating a a punch to the face. Yeah, but it's a shitty reason, contrary to the notion of liberal democracy. Free discourse should always be allowed, and words should never merit violent responses. Sure, there are things people could say that would make me beat their asses, but I'd be wrong to do so, and the law should certainly look on it as such. No insult against my faith is mine to avenge. Edit: Of course, a lot of speech can be hateful or wrong. But it should all be legal. Honestly, I think misogyny is wrong, along with intolerance, blasphemy, racism, and all sorts of other things. But my personal disagreements should be expressed in free discourse, not by trying to silence those with whom I disagree. + Show Spoiler + It is still not ideal, and shouldn't really be the case, but I do understand certain very limited exceptions, like banning holocaust denial in countries that participated in it. | ||
|
Millitron
United States2611 Posts
On May 05 2015 00:43 Nyxisto wrote: For acknowledging that it doesn't make much sense to define a human being's rights solely by terms of physical health, like a farm animal? Stripping someone of their dignity can be much worse than causing them physical harm. There's a reason a lot of countries punish hate speech, racist statements or propaganda. Attacking people verbally at the core of what they are can just be as devastating a a punch to the face. The thing about physical harm is that the victim can't just ignore it. Verbal attacks can just be ignored and suddenly they don't hurt. You can't will a punch to not hurt, you can will an insult to not hurt. | ||
|
heliusx
United States2306 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 05 2015 00:47 Yoav wrote: Yeah, but it's a shitty reason, contrary to the notion of liberal democracy. Free discourse should always be allowed, and words should never merit violent responses. Sure, there are things people could say that would make me beat their asses, but I'd be wrong to do so, and the law should certainly look on it as such. No insult against my faith is mine to avenge. Fee discourse is allowed. But many of the countries that have those laws also have a history of that speech being used to rally groups of people to do hateful things. Sometimes entire governments were mobilized. And even the US has limits on free speech and expression. Gatherings that required someone to hide their identity are not allowed in the US. One of the most important parts of free speech is to recognize when it is being as a method to harm people. Every hate group has always said they are just excising their right to free speech, right up to the point where they hurt people. On May 05 2015 00:48 Millitron wrote: The thing about physical harm is that the victim can't just ignore it. Verbal attacks can just be ignored and suddenly they don't hurt. You can't will a punch to not hurt, you can will an insult to not hurt. If only people have perfect control over their emotions, this would be true. But sadly, emotions are not rational, logical actors. | ||
|
Sbrubbles
Brazil5776 Posts
On May 05 2015 00:29 Nyxisto wrote: I don't think this "sticks and stone will break my bones.." mentality makes a lot of sense. People can literally be bullied to insanity by words alone, no violence needed. Words can be at least as harmful as physical violence, we're intellectual beings, not cows. That's not supposed to be an excuse for terrorism but if someone insults your dead mother he pretty much deserves a punch in the face. There's a thick line between a bit of justified violence (punching someone for insulting a loved one) and murder/terrorism. There's no point in comparing them in any way. | ||
|
puerk
Germany855 Posts
When you start advocating policies because you fundamentally missunderstand humans, bad things follow. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
As Nyx said, it's a little silly to define harm in purely physical terms. Say we have two scenarios: A bunch of bullies torment a gay kid all throughout high school, right before graduation one of two things happen: 1. The kid kills himself 2. The kid kills the bullies Who decides what is "justified violence", whatever that means, anyways? | ||
|
Yoav
United States1874 Posts
On May 05 2015 00:53 Plansix wrote: Fee discourse is allowed. But many of the countries that have those laws also have a history of that speech being used to rally groups of people to do hateful things. Sometimes entire governments were mobilized. One of the most important parts of free speech is to recognize when it is being as a method to harm people. Every hate group has always said they are just excising their right to free speech, right up to the point where they hurt people. Okay, but surely the irony is apparent, right? Yes, speech has been used for evil. And governments were the greatest criminals! Let's give governments more power over free fucking speech to keep that from happening again. The idea behind free discourse is that it's better to have this out in the real of ideas. Racism should be rejected because it's stupid, not because it's illegal. Any other solution is brittle to simply subversion, and comes down even easier if somebody in government has different ideas. Example of countries that tried to outlaw ideologies with counterproductive results are all around. Turkey, Egypt, basically any country around the time of colonial independence or popular revolution... | ||
|
puerk
Germany855 Posts
On May 05 2015 01:10 ticklishmusic wrote: I don't see this thick line really. If you're deliberately provoking someone (and let's be real, there was no way that this was not meant to be a provocation), you invite some sort of response. While that response might be morally, ethically, and legally wrong, you can't not (double negative, gross) understand the POV of the aggressor to some degree. As Nyx said, it's a little silly to define harm in purely physical terms. Say we have two scenarios: A bunch of bullies torment a gay kid all throughout high school, right before graduation one of two things happen: 1. The kid kills himself 2. The kid kills the bullies Who decides what is "justified violence", whatever that means, anyways? The bullies did everything right, as they used words to freely express themselfs. The kid did everything wrong, as he should have just ignored them, and not interfered with their freedom to express themselfs. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On May 05 2015 01:12 puerk wrote: The bullies did everything right, as they used words to freely express themselfs. The kid did everything wrong, as he should have just ignored them, and not interfered with their freedom to express themselfs. I really hope you're being sarcastic. | ||
|
Yoav
United States1874 Posts
On May 05 2015 01:10 ticklishmusic wrote: Who decides what is "justified X", whatever that means, anyways? This works as an argument for any "X," which means it's not a good argument. "General consensus" is its technical and provisional answer as regards governance, and "God" is its ultimate answer. Yes, there are times when recourse to violence is justified. Your gay kid is not ultimately answering words with violence, he is trying to fight an oppressive system. It's probably not the best way to do so; persuasion, garnering visibility and sympathy, using courage and nonviolence would be better. But it's more understandable that a kid would have difficulty playing Gandhi in this situation, and any half-decent school administrator would take that into account when giving out punishments. | ||
| ||
|
|
Replay Cast
LiuLi Cup
Online Event
BSL Team Wars
Team Hawk vs Team Sziky
Online Event
SC Evo League
Online Event
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
CSO Contender
[BSL 2025] Weekly
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
