|
Feb. 11th, 2016|06:04 pm |
yes you said ‘asshole’ alright
I’m not sure how well you now the language, but context-wise “prick” & “dick,” your favorite “asshole,” essential British choad “wanker,” shithead or even “pussy” all are derogatory names used for one particular gender. Add to this “kā arī iespēja no asprātīgas un mazliet kautrīgas dāmas nesāpīgi uzzināt, kas ir feminisms” and you’ve already established what kind of advocacy this is all about.
The same goes about free speech. Sure you can mix/play (with) it with ‘freedom of hate speech’ but it shows how someone understands the concept of one fundamental human right. I’ll skip going deeper into how it (legally) differs from … (it’s gonna take too long + I’m not sure about getting another “you’ve lost me”)
in shorty-short: Should hate speech be discouraged? Sure. And it’s always much easier to defend someone’s right to say something with which you agree or /and share the same point of view. But, you also have a duty (if we are talking about free society) to defend speech to which you may strongly object.
… … …
+ Scots are tough people. Well, maybe not all of them.
regarding “to answer for a quote by someone else is a bit too much” in particular and the whole thing as it is:
Normally, quotations should support someone's point, evidence, or giving examples or illustrating etc .
Normally, it should not repeat information or disagree with your point.
Normally.
And there was no any other explanation where you stand on this particular video/matter/case.
So I made an assumption that you share the same point of view.
To be sure, I needed a clarification.
I got it from you.
Hence merci.
finishing this (yea - you can safely call it a rant) :
there is a bright side in this conversation - it is highly unlikely that I’ll make another attempt
to clarify your position on your own posts |
|