Woke

You remember Europeans being prosecuted for hate speech from the 80s and 90s? And people in the US throwing the term around? Legit question. I'm not old enough to remember.

NM. I see that you said prosecuted, LOL.

IDK which Euro countries are making you concerned, but we have a 1st amendment here that protects us. A state can pass a law. Congress can try to pass a law. They're not changing the constitution, and we are protected by the courts. I don't think that's changing.

The first thing I found is a law forcing Facebook to take down hateful speech. It doesn't say anything about prosecuting the person who said it.


Here is an article mentioning prosecutions for denying the holocaust and praising terrorism, so there's that.


Here is an article indicating that free speech hasn't always been widely enjoyed in Europe:

Freedom of expression has always been unevenly protected in Europe. This is because of a philosophical divide that cuts across the continent: Some European countries can be classified as militant democracies. In these countries, the state limits freedom of speech and association when it is deemed to threaten other values outlined in the constitution, such as democracy and the freedom of others. Germany, which regularly bans or has banned various Communist, National Socialist, and Islamist organizations, is a classic example. France, which prohibits Holocaust denial, shuts down mosques it deems too radical and aggressively enforces laws against hate speech and glorification of terrorism, also falls mainly into this camp.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ttucke11
Ask yourself this simple question...is a woman a person? If so, then it's not the inverse. I can't believe you've written 3 paragraphs about this, and I'm not continuing on this semantic journey with you. Find help.
Simpler question...if a "person" is pregnant is it a woman? (and I even went as far as to specifically mention the nerfing aspect as "pregnant person" is a grayer turn of phrase than "birthing person" in how it's used)

And if you've personally deemed the discussion not worth your while by all means, bail. No harm done.
 
NM. I see that you said prosecuted, LOL.

IDK which Euro countries are making you concerned, but we have a 1st amendment here that protects us. A state can pass a law. Congress can try to pass a law. They're not changing the constitution, and we are protected by the courts. I don't think that's changing.

The first thing I found is a law forcing Facebook to take down hateful speech. It doesn't say anything about prosecuting the person who said it.


Here is an article mentioning prosecutions for denying the holocaust and praising terrorism, so there's that.


Here is an article indicating that free speech hasn't always been widely enjoyed in Europe:

Freedom of expression has always been unevenly protected in Europe. This is because of a philosophical divide that cuts across the continent: Some European countries can be classified as militant democracies. In these countries, the state limits freedom of speech and association when it is deemed to threaten other values outlined in the constitution, such as democracy and the freedom of others. Germany, which regularly bans or has banned various Communist, National Socialist, and Islamist organizations, is a classic example. France, which prohibits Holocaust denial, shuts down mosques it deems too radical and aggressively enforces laws against hate speech and glorification of terrorism, also falls mainly into this camp.

I admit I'm a bit ignorant on all the speech laws across Europe, but the investigation of McGregor in Ireland for incitement and hate speech is what immediately came to mind. As well as gender pronoun laws in the UK. I think it's not crazy to believe some activist judges here would try and use some loopholes into circumventing the 1st.
 
I admit I'm a bit ignorant on all the speech laws across Europe, but the investigation of McGregor in Ireland for incitement and hate speech is what immediately came to mind. As well as gender pronoun laws in the UK. I think it's not crazy to believe some activist judges here would try and use some loopholes into circumventing the 1st.
Gender pronoun laws are a complete crock of $hit.
 
Gaslighting a language? That's an over-used buzzword and this may take the cake. The point of the post is it's silly for people to get much more worked up about an inoffensive word than they do domestic violence. It's OK to want to have a debate about it. But it's insane behavior to choose this moment to freak out about it. You're not a diseased mind. I'm calling out the diseased minds
I get what you're saying. Freaking out over language when a woman has been beaten up misses the point . . . but so does going out of your way to inject agenda driven language into a report about a woman being beaten up. It's an odd hill for both sides to die on.
 
I get what you're saying. Freaking out over language when a woman has been beaten up misses the point . . . but so does going out of your way to inject agenda driven language into a report about a woman being beaten up. It's an odd hill for both sides to die on.

It's just like TDS. The people who think wokeism is a disease ironically seem to be infected.



How often does he get to post about and seemingly freak out about, others freaking out in his opinion, until he’s officially considered to be “infected”
 
  • Like
Reactions: 85SugarVol
I admit I'm a bit ignorant on all the speech laws across Europe, but the investigation of McGregor in Ireland for incitement and hate speech is what immediately came to mind. As well as gender pronoun laws in the UK. I think it's not crazy to believe some activist judges here would try and use some loopholes into circumventing the 1st.
Thought excercise; if you wanted to have your ideology (regardless of what that might actually be) ascend into the current zeitgeist and you viewed the 1A as a hindrance how would you go about undermining it's authority?
 
I'm old enough to have heard this was supposed to have happened by now when people were saying it in the 80's and 90's.
So when will we know if the 1st has been degraded?

If in the future US citizens face action from the State under the guise that their hate speech has resulted in a “harm” to others? Will that be it?
 
Ask yourself this simple question...is a woman a person? If so, then it's not the inverse. I can't believe you've written 3 paragraphs about this, and I'm not continuing on this semantic journey with you. Find help.
Person is not the inverse of woman. A woman is a person, so is a man.

But with regards to pregnancy, it is unnecessarily vague. Why choose to be unnecessarily vague?
 
What control, tho? ABC is exercising their freedom of speech to say it how they want to, and this dude is freaking out about it like he's the bizarro world PC police that's not really bizarro anymore at all at this point. Horseshoe theory.
Can ywo things be true at the same time? Can the headline be ridiculous and the (alleged)actions by Miller be ridiculous?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GAVol
I get what you're saying. Freaking out over language when a woman has been beaten up misses the point . . . but so does going out of your way to inject agenda driven language into a report about a woman being beaten up. It's an odd hill for both sides to die on.

I just think in general, all things political, we'd be doing a lot better if everyone would learn to pick good battles. Save the person/woman battle for when somebody attacks you for saying "woman." That's the right moment to battle. I can't imagine thinking that the right moment to battle is because someone said "person."
 

VN Store



Back
Top