tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post8073550378198020297..comments2024-03-26T06:17:49.527-07:00Comments on Had Enough Therapy?: Hating Hate SpeechStuart Schneidermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12784043736879991769noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-89012295480595168152013-12-22T08:24:45.027-08:002013-12-22T08:24:45.027-08:00Hate speech is anything that offends somebody who ...Hate speech is anything that offends somebody who is an officially recognized victim group, or a liberal taking offense for them. Mostly the latter.Sam L.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00996809377798862214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-2394329141538044742013-12-22T07:26:21.652-08:002013-12-22T07:26:21.652-08:00I am paraphrasing here. Have you ever notice that...I am paraphrasing here. Have you ever notice that for the Left, mostly, freedom of speech is like a streetcar. When they come to their stop they get off? That seems to be the "modus operandi" of the Left on almost ever issue they get involved. Everything is acceptable until they have the power then the very concepts they held dear no longer apply?<br />One wonders that the gay lobby thinks that what was stated which was a description of part of homosexuality was vulgar. This seems to be a strange "position" to take.<br />One of the most important freedoms we have is free speech and the ability to state what we believe, emphasis on believe. Once it is in the marketplace of ideas it can be challenged and discussed. Forcing ideas underground creates an unseen army of adherents that will grow unimpeded.<br />One of the worse concept going is the idea of "hate speech." Who decides what is "hate speech?" Those who live by the concept of "hate speech" will surely die by "hate speech." How long does one suppose that most on the Left would survive "hate speech" laws?<br />It should not surprise anyone that when a group of people no longer believe they have the intellectual capacity to provide a well reason argumentation for the ideas they espouse that STFU way of dealing with that lack becomes extant.<br />The backlash that GLAAD is getting should have been foreseeable. One has to know when not to jump the shark. Cracker Barrel, whose action were mild by comparison, is being told in no uncertain language that the need to rethink their decision. Sadly, here a little moral persuasion would have gone a long way to ameliorating and creating a better understanding as well.Dennishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14962996070458991675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-34822319314769977892013-12-21T18:03:55.883-08:002013-12-21T18:03:55.883-08:00Original sin was loss of faith (i.e. trust).
As f...Original sin was loss of faith (i.e. trust).<br /><br />As for the Torah, since the fall of Israel, it no longer governs secular affairs. It remains a record of God's philosophy and historical accounts. It's wisdom still provides guidance, but cannot be followed verbatim in a fallen world. We wanted emancipation and we got it, along with the challenges which it entails.<br /><br />That said, dysfunctional behaviors, including homosexual, elective abortion, adultery, etc., can be judged by the fitness they engender or deprive. It is a society's responsibility to properly classify behaviors for normalization, tolerance, and rejection, and it is our burden to enforce the constructed moral philosophy.<br /><br />Homosexual behavior when practiced by a minority can be tolerated, but there is no legitimate cause to normalize it. Elective abortion is the denial of our inalienable right to life and it must be rejected. Adultery is in the same class as original sin and enjoys similar consequences.n.nhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04252447117532342957noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-21157317675722364372013-12-21T17:47:15.160-08:002013-12-21T17:47:15.160-08:00I trust you will understand if I don't accept ...I trust you will understand if I don't accept Sullivan's statements/comments/arguments. Sam L.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00996809377798862214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8078379512095504946.post-4363369875932420112013-12-21T11:47:19.703-08:002013-12-21T11:47:19.703-08:00The first amendment protects unpopular speech. Rob...The first amendment protects unpopular speech. Robertson's isn't even unpopular. Preachers and Popes are always warning about sin and describing it to their flocks. It may not be what people want to hear, but they can use that information however they choose.<br /><br /> We do not teach in the rhetorical model; Public education replaced church based. we do not debate in public; we tweet and use a few second sound bites. It takes more time and introspection to tackle large topics that historic great thinkers spent lifetimes studying than we give respect to today.<br /><br />The current Pope may believe he was defusing the cultural battle, that the economic one was the true evil in the world, but I think he was wrong in not focusing on the eternal instead of the temporal. The economy of every economic system has ups and downs. <br /><br />Anus and vagina are not the vulgar forms of anatomical terms. They are more medical and formal. I suspect it is anus that makes people flinch. The vulgar words are used more in public discussion.<br /><br />During Obama's administration, the creep of government into private life has been huge. We are supposed to talk about government health care over our holidays. I will argue that the blurring of public/private does not make this a clear case of Robertson not having first amendment rights in this case. The group that got after A&E is a political lobbying group that uses its resources to help make law. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com