Sorry everyone…last night/this morning was a rough one…rest assured I'm feeling some shame.

1) You're saying spite, as opposed to political tensions based on a huge number of factors is what's responsible for the Space Race/the construction of the Great Wall — fuck you, immediately.

Dewey defeats Trump!

The facts of this case are particular and concerning enough to warrant legal action, I can't argue against that. I don't necessarily have enough faith for the judiciary, and then society, to recognize/establish boundaries on speech, especially in a world of relatively unfettered online communication.

To be a touch more specific about the here-to-there question you raise, it's all about undefined speech falling under a specific category that a judiciary probably can't/won't define properly. Your 'someone yelling fire' example only applies if it's false; otherwise, someone yelling fire is a potentially life-saving…

A very well-stated rebuttal. I concede there's some hyperbole to my fears, but I'd argue that they're not necessarily without grounding. Your example of yelling fire is based and having someone burst into flames is also a bit more-than-realistic, though.

Limitation of speech, firstly.

I think you're misguided on at least two fronts. 1) Stupid people on the internet don't think twice about much of anything; and we as a society should be glad to exist in a world in which stupid internet people have a pretty minimal influence (I get that it seems more pronounced in the universe commenters exist in,…

That's kind of what I'm getting at — I think it's great that a character in a popular show is revealed to be gay and it's basically one sentence before we (the audience) moves onto the next thing. That said, I understand why someone might prefer more attention to be paid to the revelation.

It's a fallacy to call a logical fallacy a fallacy.

There is a lot of potential for this case to end up as a slippery slope. No good will come of this, for either side of the debate.

So I assume you think it's better to not put emphasis on a character's (or individual's) sexuality? I personally think that it's great that someone's preference is simply their preference and there is no further need to discuss it, but I understand why people may want attention paid to what is still a lifestyle that…

Oh, I meant on the show; I asked elsewhere about this though — is it preferable that Jesus' homosexuality is not made a big deal of, or would it be better for the show to really focus on it?

You're really reaching with that interpretation.

Please explain…I'm not super well—versed in popular culture…

I thought in Highlander 2 they took it further back and made him Egyptian…I could be wrong on that…

Isn't Connery's character in Highlander supposed to be Egyptian?

I get where you're coming from. I'll point to my earlier use of "relatively" in regards to the harmlessness of flat earth bullshit. I'm totally in support of the idea that this kind of silliness is detrimental, and that we should do everything we can to stem its tide. I understand there's actual harm caused by…

Did you know the set was bombed because the town it was filmed in hated the production so much?

Calm down, bud. I'm 100% with you — the flat earth thing is ridiculous bullshit. And yes, we should 'nip that shit in the bud' at every opportunity. What I'm hung up on is the idea that the way to do that is through violent reaction. I shake my head at people who believe the earth is flat or that evolution isn't…