It’s your general ambiance I take issue with. But be well and merry and you do you.

The very one!

not just men, tho

Anjelica Huston’s moral compass seems way off when it comes to men/very young girls - her upbringing was super fucked up and Terry Richardson’s photographer dad left his family for her when she was still a teen model.

But those guidelines and those definitions, who is setting them? And worse, who benefits? Plenty of people find things offensive and wrong and are scared by the utterance of those things but demanding that the world respect that just creates a game of Oppression Olympics. No one wins at that.

But being offensive is the primary component to hate speech.

I don’t think you know what the word irony means, perhaps you went to school with Alanis Morisette.

Ummmm...who are all these black people not believing in science and where did you find them? We need “more” black people believing in science? What the FUCK are you saying and do you HEAR yourself?

No, there could not be a good debate about banning hate speech.

No promotion of violence at all. This was already about 10 years ago actually. I’ll see if I can find a link.

It’s not really in dispute though. Jerusalem is where the Parliment meets, its where the Capital is listed in the CIA World Fact Book. He wasn’t lying (for once).

I don’t know if you are American, but NO this is a terrible idea. Do you want a Trump administration to have any hand in what is considered hate speech? He’d lock up black people for using the N-word amongst themselves. Hell I could imagine him going after Kaepernic for kneeling as some kind of hate demonstration.

It’s not a zero sum game. You can be religious and a thirst for scientific inquiry and understanding. One need only look at Father Georges Lemaitre, the physicist who developed the idea of the Big Bang Theory. Or the Vatican Observatory.

I know of at least one instance of a man jailed for speaking against homosexuality. Whatever your view is on that, he was not condoning any sort of violence, promoting a violent group, or in any other way inciting violence. But he was jailed for what he was saying.

That’s a terrible idea.

One glimmer of the law’s utility might be seen in the decision by many Canadian media outlets not to re-publish the offending Charlie Hebdo cartoons

No, Canada’s laws are not good. They’re great for the people in power, not great for any serious dissenter. Canada does not have free speech. All it does is prevent serious discourse.

the words don’t matter. most racists don’t use out and out hate speech.

The best defense against hate speech is to out the hate speakers, not to ban them.

No, we definitely don’t.