UA responsibility tangent from political meme thread

You think you’re trying to be clever. But, cannot come up with something on your own, so you want to take my post and make it your own. Just say what you want to say. No need to hide behind my post.

No, I'm trying to bring out the problem with saying something like this is a matter of opinion. It also points out the problem with dismissing a viewpoint that doesn't agree with yours as "just an opinion."

I never said anything was a matter of opinion. This is the same problem in the arguments against UA. You think something is being said and you are arguing against that. I never said any thing was a matter of opinion. I made a statement. You asked which is which. If you can’t tell, then that only illustrates my original point. By attempting to stifle one person’s point of view, the statement was made that the other person should have all kinds of violence heaped against him and his family. So, if you can’t tell the difference, and 14th doctor can’t tell the difference, then my statement is all mine. You make your own statement. Which is which?

The decider, duh.

That's actually my point. When someone refuses to accept anyone else's viewpoint, they live in a solipsist bubble. Life is much simpler to sort out when they're the only ones that matter. Who cares about getting along with anyone? Happiness is zero-sum, to make someone else happy means that I have to give up some of my happiness.

You’re going to have to explain to me, like I’m 5 what any of that has to do with my post. My post was just highlighting that while 14th doctor was arguing against other’s ability to spew hate speech, he engaged in it himself.

Your post seems to be saying the same thing.

But, you started off appearing to be arguing against my point. So, now I’m confused. Please explain to me what you’re saying but keep in mind I’ve already once this week lost my temper with someone (not on this board) using 1000 words when 5 will do.

It sounds like UA doesn't give a shit what anyone thinks and feels like it's detracting from his happiness to take into consideration someone else's.
Sorry, that's a lot more than five, but
Or maybe this works better: the guy is an asshole...

I didnt ask how yay feel about UA. I asked what your post had to do with mine.

How do you not slit UA's throat while he sleeps?

Unless domestic abuse is your kink?

I said "hurting someone's feelings is harming them."

You disagreed, and accused me of calling it harm as an excuse to curtail speech I don't like.

I admit I got convoluted from there, so I'll state things more clearly: I personally believe that free speech is more important than hurt feelings, and mere offense is not a good enough reason to censor someone. I disagree with your assumption.

Had you used more general phrasing, such as "one could use the word 'harm' as an excuse to curtail speech they don't like," my response would have been "So what? Does not calling it 'harm' change anything?"

Do you have any other objections to me describing hurt feelings as harm?

Why did the Uncle Albert cross the road?

I don't have to explain myself to you. If I want to cross a road, I'll cross it. It's none of your goddamn business why!

If that's the motive behind him being this big of a douche, then I'm not the one being intellectually dishonest.

I mean, c'mon:

Ironically, 14ths response is clearly satire.

actually, he's doing a fair impression of UA, just without the insults.

OMG a thread so horrid I am unable to really do anything but add my flavor to it and be done.

When I can't fuck a thread up you know it is pure troll trash.

Some speech however doesn't stop at speech.
History, both distant and present shows it again, and again, and again.
"Why did the n-word cross the road? " eventually leads to "...but seriously, they commit all the crime " leads to "we should get our boys together, and do something about it. ".
We take extra steps for those "hurt feelings" because hurt feelings is testing the fucking water.

every time. That is the slickest slippery slope I have ever seen.

if you look down the slope you see the pool at the bottom where they are all sexist too. That is a big fucking pool of slop. UA and FF are gargling the shitwater down there like an energy drink.

I mean, we just literally had a Gamergate assassin, so...there you go.

I thought the idea was you tried to climb out of the poll, not try to devolve into a scumsucking fish because you like sexism, racism, and prejudice bigotry.

When people show you who they are, believe it.

I genuinely fell for the "freedom of speech" horseshit.
When the CHUDs started oozing in, I told myself it was "bad apples" and when Sargon Of Akkad laughed at the death of Heather Heyer, I knew it was a shit movement, and was never good.
These movements don't come to you with their crazy face on, they have the rationality mask on at first.
At least this one did.
QAnon was always fucking unhinged, I don't know how that took.

Watching Dinner become an unhinged racist/misogynist probably helped snap me out of it too, come to think of it.

Another reformed alcoholic insisting NOBODY can handle their liquor.

"Ew hew hew. When will everyone see the light like meee?? "

Except Gamergate isn't booze, it's arsenic.

Not really. You keep repeating the same argument. Why?

Can we have a double-splinter "Jenee and Spaceturkey play 'who's on first?'" thread?

What are you, the fucking hall monitor?

Someone's extra cranky today.

If it doesn't stop at speech, then it goes beyond free speech ideals and the protections don't apply.

I don't like it, but it's just speech.

That's demonstrably not true, and could be considered defamation, among other things. Gray area.

Incitement of violence, not protected speech.

If certain types of speech can be an indicator of actual crimes, then by all means, keep an eye out.

A Priest, a Rabbi, and an Uncle Albert walk into a bar.

Uncle Albert sits there and complains incessantly all night because he's a miserable human being.

At closing time, he insists he's not responsible for his tab because he didn't explicitly agree to pay for his drinks upfront, and it's not his fault the bartender didn't explicitly state the drinks were not free before serving him.