Key word - "thinks". You can't make thoughts a crime!! If he tries to take actions to commit genocide (or assault, or harassment, or any other crime) then put him in jail! But "thought crimes" are against the First Amendment and un-American.

You must be a law student and not a lawyer. "Victim's first amendment rights…" You will get laughed out of court.

If you are willing to go to jail for assault, then by all means. For an officer of the court who pledged to uphold the law, you are too easily drawn to unlawful conduct.

The upvotes for this comment makes me shake my head. The AV Club is typically a fairly thoughtful, sophisticated lot. You are asking for mob rule and chaos.

It is not impossible at all. In fact, it is what any reasonable person would do.

The unintended consequences of this are obvious. The more you punch Richard Spencers of the world, the more Richard Spencers and the more violence you will have.

By responding to their violent acts with violence? Because the USA and the Allies certainly did not respond to the Nazis' speech with violence.

When neo-Nazis participate in violence, their acts should be met with violence (preferably by the state in the form of police). But speech (even Nazi hate speech) is not violence.

Violence in response to speech is not justified. If you disagree, you don't value free speech. (Also, the implication that people who support free speech are also somehow against Trayvon Martin or Black Lives Matter is insulting and inaccurate.)

Sorry. I meant "decide" like reflect on the fact that your orientation has changed and then act accordingly. Not like "decide" as in willing yourself to change orientation. I think we are on the same page.

I think we're saying the same thing. You can't change your sexual orientation but your sexual orientation can change.

There's a difference between ex-gay therapy (which is basically forced on children) and a person deciding not to be gay anymore. If gender and sexuality are fluid, surely someone (certainly not everyone) can change to be ex-gay.

I find pedophilia disgusting and morally repulsive. Does that give me the right to beat up every member of NAMBLA? I think abortion is an evil, equivalent to murder. Does that mean I can beat up a Planned Parenthood supporter? I think the Westboro Baptist Church is morally repulsive. Can I beat them up too?

Also, We didn't fight Hitler because of his ideas. We fought Hitler because he invaded all of Europe. The violence of the Allies was in response to the violence of the Nazis. I would treat Spencer the same.

You are wrong. There is a difference between speech and violence. Speech is not violence. There is no moral relativism at play here. If you justify violence in response to speech that you find morally repulsive, be prepared for a lot of violence. The counter examples are obvious. For example, 50 years ago it was…

Fair enough.

I'm not arguing that they are the same. I am criticizing the pop culture activists that have turned a blind eye to Obama's use of violence, and his failures that have produced serious unintended consequences.

So violence is justified if you disagree with someone?

You forget that in the 1940s, the Nazis actually engaged in warfare and invaded all of Europe. They took the fight to the Allies. If Richard Spencer or any other Nazi (as detestable as they may be) did not threaten others with violence, violence is not justified.

I have to agree with you. As satisfying as punching a Nazi may be, a civil society cannot condone violence in response to free speech. Violence will only justify greater violence in response, turning this Cold Civil War into a hot one. And where does it end? If violence against Nazis is ok, what about other groups…