Total Posts:21|Showing Posts:1-21
Jump to topic:

England is a Cesspit

dogparktom
Posts: 112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2010 7:11:02 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
"England is a cesspit. England is the breeding ground of fundamentalist Muslims. Its social logic is to allow all religions to preach openly. But this is illogic, because none of the other religions preach apocalyptic violence. And yet England allows it. Remember, that country was the breeding ground for communism, too. Karl Marx did all his work in libraries there."
http://www.thedailybeast.com...

Should religions that preach and encourage violence against unbelievers be prohibited by law?
banker
Posts: 1,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2010 7:15:40 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/4/2010 7:11:02 AM, dogparktom wrote:
"England is a cesspit. England is the breeding ground of fundamentalist Muslims. Its social logic is to allow all religions to preach openly. But this is illogic, because none of the other religions preach apocalyptic violence. And yet England allows it. Remember, that country was the breeding ground for communism, too. Karl Marx did all his work in libraries there."
http://www.thedailybeast.com...

Should religions that preach and encourage violence against unbelievers be prohibited by law?

true and this is where all evil in world is coming out from here you could see hitler and rothchilds started there too..!!

http://www.apfn.org...
the most important source for muslim Arabs:

"And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd'.".

- Qur'an 17:104 -

Any sincere muslim must recognize the Land they call "Palestine" as the Jewish Homeland, according to the book considered by muslims to be the most sacred word and Allah's ultimate revelation.

Ibn Khaldun, one of the most creditable
Quail_man
Posts: 66
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2010 7:20:10 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I'd rather have the radical muslims trained in england where they can be closely watched and followed rather than leaving for Pakistan and getting trained there. When its preached openly then there is no incentive to hide it. When its hidden its much harder to track vs done openly.

Know your enemies.
banker
Posts: 1,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2010 7:27:33 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/4/2010 7:20:10 AM, Quail_man wrote:
I'd rather have the radical muslims trained in england where they can be closely watched and followed rather than leaving for Pakistan and getting trained there. When its preached openly then there is no incentive to hide it. When its hidden its much harder to track vs done openly.

Know your enemies.

so why dont you join them and invite them in your home? have them "watched" 24/7. ?
the most important source for muslim Arabs:

"And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd'.".

- Qur'an 17:104 -

Any sincere muslim must recognize the Land they call "Palestine" as the Jewish Homeland, according to the book considered by muslims to be the most sacred word and Allah's ultimate revelation.

Ibn Khaldun, one of the most creditable
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2010 7:38:42 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Err....No the OP's question, freedom of religion and speech and all that.

I agree with AskQuail. It's better to have them monitored in England than trained in unwatched Pakistan, Libya, etc.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
banker
Posts: 1,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2010 7:44:15 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/4/2010 7:38:42 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Err....No the OP's question, freedom of religion and speech and all that.

I agree with AskQuail. It's better to have them monitored in England than trained in unwatched Pakistan, Libya, etc.

so we have the gov raping us with body scanners..!! stealing our privacy..!! and on the other hand giving hospitality for terrorists...!!
the most important source for muslim Arabs:

"And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd'.".

- Qur'an 17:104 -

Any sincere muslim must recognize the Land they call "Palestine" as the Jewish Homeland, according to the book considered by muslims to be the most sacred word and Allah's ultimate revelation.

Ibn Khaldun, one of the most creditable
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2010 7:46:32 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/4/2010 7:44:15 AM, banker wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:38:42 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Err....No the OP's question, freedom of religion and speech and all that.

I agree with AskQuail. It's better to have them monitored in England than trained in unwatched Pakistan, Libya, etc.

so we have the gov raping us with body scanners..!! stealing our privacy..!! and on the other hand giving hospitality for terrorists...!!

Monitored =/= all of the above. Besides, how is monitoring terrorists aiding them?

Also, tell your secretary to start spelling better.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
banker
Posts: 1,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2010 8:04:47 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/4/2010 7:46:32 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:44:15 AM, banker wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:38:42 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Err....No the OP's question, freedom of religion and speech and all that.

I agree with AskQuail. It's better to have them monitored in England than trained in unwatched Pakistan, Libya, etc.

so we have the gov raping us with body scanners..!! stealing our privacy..!! and on the other hand giving hospitality for terrorists...!!

Monitored =/= all of the above. Besides, how is monitoring terrorists aiding them?

they are monitoring us not them..!! this topic expressing outrage against englends rules that is attrecting them and allowing them in england..!!
your arguing, that is benaficial to have him as nighbors. moreover your arguing that we are more secured, if they are living next to our kids, and family..!! your the one reffering to this as monitoring...!! i am not agreeing with you..!!

so your stupid arguments is not to be blamed on me..!!

now are you a lib.? i try to figure why you blame others for your actions...!! otherwise why you want me to explain, why your idiotic arguments is logical.?

Also, tell your secretary to start spelling better.

how come its more logical to you, that we are gaining security by nighboring terorists. (hence you suggest we should create rules like england to attrect them)
the most important source for muslim Arabs:

"And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd'.".

- Qur'an 17:104 -

Any sincere muslim must recognize the Land they call "Palestine" as the Jewish Homeland, according to the book considered by muslims to be the most sacred word and Allah's ultimate revelation.

Ibn Khaldun, one of the most creditable
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2010 8:11:08 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/4/2010 8:04:47 AM, banker wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:46:32 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:44:15 AM, banker wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:38:42 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Err....No the OP's question, freedom of religion and speech and all that.

I agree with AskQuail. It's better to have them monitored in England than trained in unwatched Pakistan, Libya, etc.

so we have the gov raping us with body scanners..!! stealing our privacy..!! and on the other hand giving hospitality for terrorists...!!

Monitored =/= all of the above. Besides, how is monitoring terrorists aiding them?

they are monitoring us not them..!! this topic expressing outrage against englends rules that is attrecting them and allowing them in england..!!
your arguing, that is benaficial to have him as nighbors. moreover your arguing that we are more secured, if they are living next to our kids, and family..!! your the one reffering to this as monitoring...!! i am not agreeing with you..!!

Would you rather them:

1) in places ike England where they are exposed to democracy and freedom of speech and will essen their fundamentalsm

OR

2) In Pakistan, Libya, etc. where they are surrounded by fundamentalism and have access to equipment to become a terrorist.


so your stupid arguments is not to be blamed on me..!!

What?


now are you a lib.? i try to figure why you blame others for your actions...!! otherwise why you want me to explain, why your idiotic arguments is logical.?

I blame no one for my actions but myself. Why is your idiotic argument logical? Why does being a conservative make you logical?


Also, tell your secretary to start spelling better.

how come its more logical to you, that we are gaining security by nighboring terorists. (hence you suggest we should create rules like england to attrect them)

Because, hey are exposed to democracy and freedom of speech, ideas that cannot be attained in Pakistan where their ideology and fundamentalism will increase. plus, they can't readily obtain bombs, guns, etc. and can be monitored. Either they go Muslim light or Apathethic, I dont' care, but in a few generations any fundamentalism would be gone.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
banker
Posts: 1,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2010 8:24:41 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/4/2010 8:11:08 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 2/4/2010 8:04:47 AM, banker wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:46:32 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:44:15 AM, banker wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:38:42 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Err....No the OP's question, freedom of religion and speech and all that.

I agree with AskQuail. It's better to have them monitored in England than trained in unwatched Pakistan, Libya, etc.

so we have the gov raping us with body scanners..!! stealing our privacy..!! and on the other hand giving hospitality for terrorists...!!

Monitored =/= all of the above. Besides, how is monitoring terrorists aiding them?

they are monitoring us not them..!! this topic expressing outrage against englends rules that is attrecting them and allowing them in england..!!
your arguing, that is benaficial to have him as nighbors. moreover your arguing that we are more secured, if they are living next to our kids, and family..!! your the one reffering to this as monitoring...!! i am not agreeing with you..!!

Would you rather them:

1) in places ike England where they are exposed to democracy and freedom of speech and will essen their fundamentalsm

OR

2) In Pakistan, Libya, etc. where they are surrounded by fundamentalism and have access to equipment to become a terrorist.

thats not the question, otherwize we would use this logic for all criminals..!!

if in your view this is the question,then answer me

would you rether have criminals

1) in places ike next to your kids and family and schools where they are exposed to manners and education and will lessen their crime

OR

2) In jail. where they are surrounded by criminals and have access to gangs and mafia inostructure

so your stupid arguments is not to be blamed on me..!!

What?


now are you a lib.? i try to figure why you blame others for your actions...!! otherwise why you want me to explain, why your idiotic arguments is logical.?

I blame no one for my actions but myself. Why is your idiotic argument logical? Why does being a conservative make you logical?

no my argument that attracting criminals to your home family and kids is exposing them to danger is logical..!!

your argument thet we should attrect criminals to our schools family and towns to gain security is idiotic..!!



Also, tell your secretary to start spelling better.

how come its more logical to you, that we are gaining security by nighboring terorists. (hence you suggest we should create rules like england to attrect them)

Because, hey are exposed to democracy and freedom of speech, ideas that cannot be attained in Pakistan where their ideology and fundamentalism will increase. plus, they can't readily obtain bombs, guns, etc. and can be monitored. Either they go Muslim light or Apathethic, I dont' care, but in a few generations any fundamentalism would be gone.

you prove: that despite your exposure to my logic, your still a idiot..!!

or vice versa ..!! but point still stands
the most important source for muslim Arabs:

"And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd'.".

- Qur'an 17:104 -

Any sincere muslim must recognize the Land they call "Palestine" as the Jewish Homeland, according to the book considered by muslims to be the most sacred word and Allah's ultimate revelation.

Ibn Khaldun, one of the most creditable
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2010 8:46:59 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/4/2010 8:24:41 AM, banker wrote:
At 2/4/2010 8:11:08 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 2/4/2010 8:04:47 AM, banker wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:46:32 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:44:15 AM, banker wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:38:42 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Err....No the OP's question, freedom of religion and speech and all that.

I agree with AskQuail. It's better to have them monitored in England than trained in unwatched Pakistan, Libya, etc.

so we have the gov raping us with body scanners..!! stealing our privacy..!! and on the other hand giving hospitality for terrorists...!!

Monitored =/= all of the above. Besides, how is monitoring terrorists aiding them?

they are monitoring us not them..!! this topic expressing outrage against englends rules that is attrecting them and allowing them in england..!!
your arguing, that is benaficial to have him as nighbors. moreover your arguing that we are more secured, if they are living next to our kids, and family..!! your the one reffering to this as monitoring...!! i am not agreeing with you..!!

Would you rather them:

1) in places ike England where they are exposed to democracy and freedom of speech and will essen their fundamentalsm

OR

2) In Pakistan, Libya, etc. where they are surrounded by fundamentalism and have access to equipment to become a terrorist.

thats not the question, otherwize we would use this logic for all criminals..!!


if in your view this is the question,then answer me

would you rether have criminals

1) in places ike next to your kids and family and schools where they are exposed to manners and education and will lessen their crime

OR

2) In jail. where they are surrounded by criminals and have access to gangs and mafia inostructure

Firstly, the analogy fails because in jail they can't harm society and are monitored. But they have severe potential to damage in events like 9/11.

I'm not talking about convicted terrorists, rather, fundamentalist Muslims who have the chance to change.


so your stupid arguments is not to be blamed on me..!!

What?


now are you a lib.? i try to figure why you blame others for your actions...!! otherwise why you want me to explain, why your idiotic arguments is logical.?

I blame no one for my actions but myself. Why is your idiotic argument logical? Why does being a conservative make you logical?

no my argument that attracting criminals to your home family and kids is exposing them to danger is logical..!!

your argument thet we should attrect criminals to our schools family and towns to gain security is idiotic..!!

Again, I'm not saying shift everyone from guantanamo to your local neighbourhood.
If it is have fundamentalists stay in Pakistan and become a terrorist or go to Britain and not become a terrorist, they option is clear.





Also, tell your secretary to start spelling better.

how come its more logical to you, that we are gaining security by nighboring terorists. (hence you suggest we should create rules like england to attrect them)

Because, hey are exposed to democracy and freedom of speech, ideas that cannot be attained in Pakistan where their ideology and fundamentalism will increase. plus, they can't readily obtain bombs, guns, etc. and can be monitored. Either they go Muslim light or Apathethic, I dont' care, but in a few generations any fundamentalism would be gone.

you prove: that despite your exposure to my logic, your still a idiot..!!

Vica versa


or vice versa ..!! but point still stands

stupid regan chrstian...!
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2010 9:03:47 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/4/2010 7:38:42 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Err....No the OP's question, freedom of religion and speech and all that.

I agree with AskQuail. It's better to have them monitored in England than trained in unwatched Pakistan, Libya, etc.

lol, who says that having them trained in one place decreases the amt. trained in another???

but, I'm not for a crackdown on thought, just killing terrorists and deporting non-citizens who sympathize with the murderous crazies.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
banker
Posts: 1,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2010 9:12:46 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/4/2010 8:46:59 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 2/4/2010 8:24:41 AM, banker wrote:
At 2/4/2010 8:11:08 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 2/4/2010 8:04:47 AM, banker wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:46:32 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:44:15 AM, banker wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:38:42 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Err....No the OP's question, freedom of religion and speech and all that.

I agree with AskQuail. It's better to have them monitored in England than trained in unwatched Pakistan, Libya, etc.

so we have the gov raping us with body scanners..!! stealing our privacy..!! and on the other hand giving hospitality for terrorists...!!

Monitored =/= all of the above. Besides, how is monitoring terrorists aiding them?

they are monitoring us not them..!! this topic expressing outrage against englends rules that is attrecting them and allowing them in england..!!
your arguing, that is benaficial to have him as nighbors. moreover your arguing that we are more secured, if they are living next to our kids, and family..!! your the one reffering to this as monitoring...!! i am not agreeing with you..!!

Would you rather them:

1) in places ike England where they are exposed to democracy and freedom of speech and will essen their fundamentalsm

OR

2) In Pakistan, Libya, etc. where they are surrounded by fundamentalism and have access to equipment to become a terrorist.

thats not the question, otherwize we would use this logic for all criminals..!!


if in your view this is the question,then answer me

would you rether have criminals

1) in places ike next to your kids and family and schools where they are exposed to manners and education and will lessen their crime

OR

2) In jail. where they are surrounded by criminals and have access to gangs and mafia inostructure

Firstly, the analogy fails because in jail they can't harm society and are monitored. But they have severe potential to damage in events like 9/11.

so they cant harm..!! but "have severe potential to damage in events like 9/11"

is it having to to do with astrolagy? whats cuasing this potential,despite that "they cant harm"?

please explain why this is not a controdiction.?

I'm not talking about convicted terrorists, true your taling about those serving notice on society that they are dangerous..!! and you admited that they"have severe potential to damage in events like 9/11"

rather, fundamentalist Muslims who have the chance to change.

yes and you suggest therefore that we should bring those who you admited that they"have severe potential to damage in events like 9/11" into our schools anf family towns..!!

once you serve notice on society, that your not fit to live amongs them peacfully, its a hazard to the community..!! they did that.!! by advocating jihad.!! and declaring that they are commited to destroy our freedom..!! and they make you aware of that..!!
semantics is not the issue, and spliting hair type of logic will only cuase us to go into circles..!!

so your stupid arguments is not to be blamed on me..!!

What?


now are you a lib.? i try to figure why you blame others for your actions...!! otherwise why you want me to explain, why your idiotic arguments is logical.?

I blame no one for my actions but myself. Why is your idiotic argument logical? Why does being a conservative make you logical?

no my argument that attracting criminals to your home family and kids is exposing them to danger is logical..!!

your argument thet we should attrect criminals to our schools family and towns to gain security is idiotic..!!


Again, I'm not saying shift everyone from guantanamo to your local neighbourhood.
If it is have fundamentalists stay in Pakistan and become a terrorist or go to Britain and not become a terrorist, they option is clear.

semantincs like jumping to the extream when your unable to defant the topic itself is dishonest debate tactic..!!

your advocating that attrecting jihadists, who served notice that they are a danger for society is going to gain security to our kids and families..!!

how come your not even explaining your position ..!!




Also, tell your secretary to start spelling better.

how come its more logical to you, that we are gaining security by nighboring terorists. (hence you suggest we should create rules like england to attrect them)

Because, hey are exposed to democracy and freedom of speech, ideas that cannot be attained in Pakistan where their ideology and fundamentalism will increase. plus, they can't readily obtain bombs, guns, etc. and can be monitored. Either they go Muslim light or Apathethic, I dont' care, but in a few generations any fundamentalism would be gone.

you prove: that despite your exposure to my logic, your still a idiot..!!

Vica versa


or vice versa ..!! but point still stands

stupid regan chrstian...!

in other words we should risk our kids and family sice exposure to logic will not change anyone...!!
the most important source for muslim Arabs:

"And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd'.".

- Qur'an 17:104 -

Any sincere muslim must recognize the Land they call "Palestine" as the Jewish Homeland, according to the book considered by muslims to be the most sacred word and Allah's ultimate revelation.

Ibn Khaldun, one of the most creditable
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2010 3:22:25 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/4/2010 7:11:02 AM, dogparktom wrote:
"England is a cesspit. England is the breeding ground of fundamentalist Muslims. Its social logic is to allow all religions to preach openly. But this is illogic, because none of the other religions preach apocalyptic violence. And yet England allows it. Remember, that country was the breeding ground for communism, too. Karl Marx did all his work in libraries there."
http://www.thedailybeast.com...

Should religions that preach and encourage violence against unbelievers be prohibited by law?

England, or rather Britain, is still the greatest nation on earth.
It's true that socialists are slowly destroying her but everything is in God's hands and I, for one, am expecting revival.
The Cross.. the Cross.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2010 4:16:19 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/5/2010 3:22:25 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
England, or rather Britain, is still the greatest nation on earth.
It's true that socialists are slowly destroying her but everything is in God's hands and I, for one, am expecting revival.

Ah, Christian nationalism without a hint of knowing what you're talking about when you say "socialists" - screams DATCMOTO all over.
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2010 6:14:42 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/4/2010 7:11:02 AM, dogparktom wrote:
"England is a cesspit. England is the breeding ground of fundamentalist Muslims. Its social logic is to allow all religions to preach openly. But this is illogic, because none of the other religions preach apocalyptic violence. And yet England allows it. Remember, that country was the breeding ground for communism, too. Karl Marx did all his work in libraries there."
http://www.thedailybeast.com...

Should religions that preach and encourage violence against unbelievers be prohibited by law?

Encouraging violence and inciting hatred as well as possessing any terrorist materials are clearly prohibited by UK law.

I believe we have slightly more restrictions on free speech than the US.

Sure people get radicalised in the UK but this happens behind closed doors and the vast majority of Muslims in England are peaceful and moderate. Terrorists don't get trained here.

Illogic is not a word.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2010 8:03:19 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/5/2010 6:14:42 AM, feverish wrote:
At 2/4/2010 7:11:02 AM, dogparktom wrote:
"England is a cesspit. England is the breeding ground of fundamentalist Muslims. Its social logic is to allow all religions to preach openly. But this is illogic, because none of the other religions preach apocalyptic violence. And yet England allows it. Remember, that country was the breeding ground for communism, too. Karl Marx did all his work in libraries there."
http://www.thedailybeast.com...

Should religions that preach and encourage violence against unbelievers be prohibited by law?

Encouraging violence and inciting hatred as well as possessing any terrorist materials are clearly prohibited by UK law.

I believe we have slightly more restrictions on free speech than the US.

Sure people get radicalised in the UK but this happens behind closed doors and the vast majority of Muslims in England are peaceful and moderate. Terrorists don't get trained here.

Illogic is not a word.

Actually, since the hate crimes bill was introduced in America last year, the restrictions on freedom of speech are about the same in the US as they are in the UK, as far as I can tell.

One difference though is that they have a constitution that guarantees freedom of speech so it may well be that someone will challenge the law if they are convicted of a hate speech crime (if this hasn't already happened).
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2010 8:26:42 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/5/2010 8:03:19 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:

Actually, since the hate crimes bill was introduced in America last year, the restrictions on freedom of speech are about the same in the US as they are in the UK, as far as I can tell.

One difference though is that they have a constitution that guarantees freedom of speech so it may well be that someone will challenge the law if they are convicted of a hate speech crime (if this hasn't already happened).

The only thing I saw in the Hate Crimes Prevention Act which seems to be explicitly unconstitutional is this:
(D) the verdict or sentence obtained pursuant to State charges left demonstratively unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence.
Which really has nothing at all to do with free speech.

I think the only way it limits free speech is if you interpret Gay-Bashing (the actual kind, not the conversational) to be an legitimate method of expression.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2010 8:31:37 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/5/2010 8:26:42 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:

I think the only way it limits free speech is if you interpret Gay-Bashing (the actual kind, not the conversational) to be an legitimate method of expression.

which would be saying that it falls under free expression to assault those you don't like so that you can get your point (that you don't like them) across.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2010 8:41:04 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Though it does create basically two different levels of protection for people.

Those who are members of oft discriminated against groups being better protected against violence than those who do not fit that description.

Which is perhaps against the spirit of our system (and is perhaps unconstitutional b\c of the Civil Rights amendments)
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2010 4:27:31 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 2/5/2010 4:16:19 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 2/5/2010 3:22:25 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
England, or rather Britain, is still the greatest nation on earth.
It's true that socialists are slowly destroying her but everything is in God's hands and I, for one, am expecting revival.

Ah, Christian nationalism without a hint of knowing what you're talking about when you say "socialists" - screams DATCMOTO all over.

If you cannot distinguish between patriotism and nationalism then you have little hope of discerning my thoughts on socialism.

Why don't you engage with me in a spirit of open discourse and friendship?
The Cross.. the Cross.