Covid-19 (Coronavirus) - Please stay safe, y'all


Status
Not open for further replies.
ElPoco said:
The problem with freedom of speech is once again that someone's freedom of speech shouldn't get in the way of someone else's freedom to live.
In France, we've got some shitty people who spread a shitty "theory" (something totally unfounded and that can be unquestionably proven to be wrong). That shitty theory got debunked plenty, but was still popular in certain circles (because no matter the fact that it was debunked with facts, data and logic, some people still consider that the debunking is just fake news from the mainstream medias) and the Christchurch shooter cited it as one of the reasons why he killed 51 people.
So the freedom of speech of these assholes infringed on the freedom of living of 51 people despite there being plenty of debate and evidence to convince people that this theory was wrong.

So I can get why you'd want to restrict freedom of speech to prevent hate speech.
On the other hand, a huge problem with censoring speech is that it means that you have an entity that's tasked with deciding what should be allowed and what shouldn't be. And it's hard to guarantee that this power will not be abused.

But then again, that shitty theory appeared and was spread in France, where we have such laws to censor hate speech. Those spreading that shitty theory either weren't censored or were condemned but kept on repeating these lies over and over anyway. So... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Click to expand...

What shitty theory was that?
Post automatically merged:

Djoga'Ro said:
Your opinions may be wrong, but they cannot be illegal. Expressing them cannot be wrong, as long as you use appropriate modifiers (opposed to stating everything as fact).
Click to expand...

Tell that to Ursula: https://www.dw.com/en/nazi-grandma-holocaust-denier-ursula-haverbeck-sentenced-to-jail/a-19522941
Post automatically merged:

ClockworkCoder said:
I feel insulted by that statement.
Click to expand...

Ha!
 
Djoga'Ro said:
Wrong. It's about discriminatory practices. If you think, Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act is still in effect, that's been repealed 7 years ago.
Click to expand...

Janice Fiamengo would beg to differ:
The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal is an extrajudicial arm of the marxist and post modernist machine, explicitly designed to destroy anyone that stands in the way of the expansion and propagation of (what will eventually turn into) communism.

It is a political organization disguised in platitudes and double speak, with lawful power and none of the oversight of the courtsystem.
 
Last edited:
Robert Taylor said:
Tell that to Ursula: https://www.dw.com/en/nazi-grandma-holocaust-denier-ursula-haverbeck-sentenced-to-jail/a-19522941
Click to expand...
Haverbeck has been convicted of crimes described here:
en.wikipedia.org

Legality of Holocaust denial - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

So you're saying, telling us your opinion would equate to promoting Nazi propaganda?

Robert Taylor said:
Janice Fiamengo would beg to differ:
The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal is an extrajudicial arm of the marxist and post modernist machine, explicitly designed to destroy anyone that stands in the way of the expansion and propagation of (what will eventually turn into) communism.
Click to expand...
That's an account of not having dealt with the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal. ?
 
Djoga'Ro said:
Haverbeck has been convicted of crimes described here: URL unfurl="true"]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_Holocaust_denial#Germany[/URL]

So you're saying, telling us your opinion would equate to promoting Nazi propaganda?
Click to expand...

I am telling you that you are NOT free to think, research and question. You claim that an opinion can never be illegal. This is not true, there are A LOT of opinions that are illegal. This is just one example.

I am telling you that the very same Nazi pogroms that were enacted running up and through WW2 are up and running right now, this time controlled by a different group of people. Just like everyone agreed with them in Nazi Germany, they agree with these pogroms now. They are simply enacted more slowly over a longer period of time so that people don't notice what is happening.

Human history is always the same.

That's an account of not having dealt with the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal. ?
Click to expand...

No, that is an account of marxist / post modernist revolutionary hand of destruction of a free person. It is the direct equivalent of Mao and Pol Pot did after their revolutions, this time done slowly so that people don't notice it. It is the SLOW AND STEADY cooking of the frog.

EDIT: Ah, I see what you are saying. I don't see the difference between having to go through a marxist / post modernist extrajudicial tribunal and a mediation BASED on their rules. It's the same thing. All that happened is that the accuser did not like the heat it was causing. These Kangaroo tribulnals haul thousands of Canadians through this mockery of justice every single year. NONE of them are allowed legal representation during the hearings in a system with legal power but without any legal oversight of the court system.

These are just a tiny example of what is actually going on out there.

Note: I edited this more than usual, hopefully its not too different from the original post.
 
Last edited:
Robert Taylor said:
I am telling you that you are NOT free to think, research and question. You claim that an opinion can never be illegal. This is not true, there are A LOT of opinions that are illegal. This is just one example
Click to expand...

Opinions are funny things. Put a group of people together, all actors and one "subject", and get the actors to state something that is obviously wrong as fact, and the subject will almost always come out of it agreeing, to the point of them also making up points to back up their newly-formed opinion.

There was a video I recently watched asking groups of 2-3 people about their opinion of same sex relationships. Mostly they all said it was fine, but a couple said it was a "difficult question", but as soon as one of them expressed a decision one way of the other, the other agreed suddenly and decisively.

Opinions are only illegal once you have the audacity to express them.
Post automatically merged:

Forgot to add, it's a fascinating discussion, albeit a peturbing one.
 
ClockworkCoder said:
Forgot to add, it's a fascinating discussion, albeit a peturbing one.
Click to expand...

I can't believe I found this video:
This video shows one of the key differentiators between humans and chimps: humans are HIGHLY HIGHLY HIGHLY compliant. There is another video that I cannot find, that was also testing the compliance of human children and the results were that human children were EXTREMELY HIGHLY INTUNED AND LOOKING FOR BEHAVIOURAL guidance from adults. A child will do anything you ask it to, without question, thought or individualistic behaviour in comparison to any other social animal. It was really disturbing in the same way that a wolf looks right through you and a dogs entire being is attuned to reading all of your body language waiting for the next command.

My initial feeling was that somewhere in our evolutionary history there was a massive die off and only a highly compliant group of our ancestors survived. But, the more I think about us the way Jane Goodall might think about chimpanzees is that we have perpetually killed off our most aggressive and individualistic members leaving behind a highly pliable / highly compliant type of chimp (us).

These days, I look around and I see just different groups of chimpanzees in perpetual war with each other. Something like this:

 
Robert Taylor said:
You claim that an opinion can never be illegal. This is not true, there are A LOT of opinions that are illegal.
Click to expand...
An opinion cannot be illegal. How would you police opinions? And - at least in my mind - there's still a difference between stating something as one's own beliefs or rather as factual or even trying to proof it.
Robert Taylor said:
EDIT: Ah, I see what you are saying. I don't see the difference between having to go through a marxist / post modernist extrajudicial tribunal and a mediation BASED on their rules. It's the same thing. All that happened is that the accuser did not like the heat it was causing. These Kangaroo tribulnals haul thousands of Canadians through this mockery of justice every single year. NONE of them are allowed legal representation during the hearings in a system with legal power but without any legal oversight of the court system.
Click to expand...
And we were talking about the Canadian HRT not the Ontario HRT. I'm not entirely sure by now and cant be bothered to look it up again, but wasn't it that the CHRT's decisions are revisable by some court?
Of course, what that woman described is still unjust and a shitshow. But also, it was not just about something she had said, was it.
Robert Taylor said:
This video shows one of the key differentiators between humans and chimps: humans are HIGHLY HIGHLY HIGHLY compliant.
Click to expand...
Were the chimps adults maybe?
 
Djoga'Ro said:
An opinion cannot be illegal. How would you police opinions? And - at least in my mind - there's still a difference between stating something as one's own beliefs or rather as factual or even trying to proof it.
Click to expand...

We may be trying to parse this a bit too much maybe? I mean, I don't know, maybe?

I once saw Dr. Jordan Peterson explain the importance of freedom of speech this way:

INTERVIEWER: Something something, people have a right to not be offended.

JP: In order to have freedom of speech sometimes people need to be offended. Look at your questions, your questions are not exactly making me comfortable.

Or something to that effect. I cannot find the timestamp, but it is in this video:
In answer to your question about policing opinion, just watch that entire interview. You will see a woman that CLEARLY polices the opinions of all of the other members of her group. This is how it works in all societies. The top controls the key influencers, the influencers control the beleifs of everyone else in the group.

Just look at what she thinks of her self and her perfomance in that interview: https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/helen-lewis-jordan-peterson

It takes someone with the depth and breadth of knowledge + male strength to put this woman in her place (not that women have a place, just that her hubris is showing without any self awareness or humble pie to be seen anywhere). I think it is pretty obvious that no woman would be able to stand up intellectually to a rube of her caliber.

The social control are built into our species.

Djoga'Ro said:
And we were talking about the Canadian HRT not the Ontario HRT. I'm not entirely sure by now and cant be bothered to look it up again, but wasn't it that the CHRT's decisions are revisable by some court?
Click to expand...

Honestly, I am not an expert on any of the topics that we have discussed. I have an idea for a website that is kind of like wikipedia that would help catalogue all of the argumenation and evidence on each issue. It would be nice to pick a topic and look up arguments and evidence.

I mean, even our courts are fucked: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/mike-ward-jeremy-gabriel-supreme-court-1.5668560

This guy actually lost and had to pay a fine FOR HURTING SOMEONES FEELINGS AT A COMEDY SHOW.


Djoga'Ro said:
Of course, what that woman described is still unjust and a shitshow. But also, it was not just about something she had said, was it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, there are a lot of layers.

Djoga'Ro said:
Were the chimps adults maybe?
Click to expand...

Possibly. I think it is striking just how compliant humans are. You can ask any human and ask them to do something and they will do it, usually without question. Like trained cattle.

I mean, that contentious woman in the Jordan Peterson video is a great example of the perpetual conflict between our need to be compliant and the occasional statistical exception like her coming along and digging her heels and and being stubborn. On the one hand, we need more of her, but on the other hand, deep down, I would not shed a tear to see her have an accident.
 
Robert Taylor said:
INTERVIEWER: Something something, people have a right to not be offended.

JP: In order to have freedom of speech sometimes people need to be offended. Look at your questions, your questions are not exactly making me comfortable.
Click to expand...
That was with some blonde, British interviewer, iirc.
Robert Taylor said:
On the one hand, we need more of her, but on the other hand, deep down, I would not shed a tear to see her have an accident.
Click to expand...
wtf. Do all people have to be born and immediately have your opinion? She let him speak his truth and actually listened. What more do you want. Are you a NSJW or sth like that?
 
Djoga'Ro said:
That was with some blonde, British interviewer, iirc.
Click to expand...

Oh, you are right.

Djoga'Ro said:
wtf. Do all people have to be born and immediately have your opinion? She let him speak his truth and actually listened. What more do you want. Are you a NSJW or sth like that?
Click to expand...

You thought she listened? Heh, no. There was no listening happening there. The only listening done was JP.
 
Robert Taylor said:
You thought she listened?
Click to expand...
I didn't say she was ready to be convinced. Looked to me like she was cautious to not maybe get convinced just by clever rhetoric. Understandebly so, when you concider, how he had been covered before. Plus, he's very thoughtful about how he expresses himself and eloquent.
ZXDunny said:
Can I just interject here
Click to expand...
Seems like you could.
 
WTF !! there is people who do sports with that thing on ?!

Anyway, if you miss breaths maybe you can lose consciousness, die out like this seems to me a little excessive... maybe the mask wasn't the only problem
 
Robert Taylor said:
. On the one hand, we need more of her, but on the other hand, deep down, I would not shed a tear to see her have an accident.
Click to expand...

you do know that your position here is somewhat self defeating? "we should be allowed to say what we want" but she should not be able to.

also, i will report this for encouraging implicit violence.
 
PREPARE YOURSELF FOR THIS !! Not for the faint of heart !!

This politician is telling that vaccines, are causing illnesses like homosexuality !!!!! :cool:

He tells, that starting from the time when some vaccines became obligatory, not only homosexuality started growing, but it was also stopped to be considered an illness !!
And because homosexuality leads to death, automatically it means that vaccines leads to death too !!
Biologists say so too !! (Actually he didn't specified who told that...)

roma.repubblica.it

Roma, "L'omosessualità è una malattia, causata anche dai vaccini: lo dicono i biologi". Le frasi shock del consigliere del XII municipio

Massimiliano Quaresima, ex 5S ora Gruppo Misto lascia di stucco l'Aula. Cita Trump, il Vaticano, il caso di Bibbiano "e altri posti simili in Italia c…
roma.repubblica.it roma.repubblica.it
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

blimpsgo180
The Definitive List of Pandora Games (native games and ports)
2 3
Replies
40
Views
35K
levi
levi
Back
Top