It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Hazardous1408
I suggested a slap...
You brought up murder.
If you can justify slapping someone because you're offended, it is within the bounds of reason that someone could justify murder for the exact same reasons.
So it appears you are trying to make the argument that there are no consequences for our words or actions, only consequences for or by those that react to our words or actions.
If so, not based in reality.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
Citizens United: Money is a form of free speech.
University of Tampa used their freedom of speech to decide they would no longer be giving money to this professor.
You either defend the principle from all attacks, or you don't. You either believe in the principle, or you don't.
See how this works?
Money is not speech. Money is a medium of exchange.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert
So it appears you are trying to make the argument that there are no consequences for our words or actions, only consequences for or by those that react to our words or actions.
If so, not based in reality.
Words specifically. Yes, my argument is that you, and not my words, control your actions. Unless you believe in sorcery, that's just how it is.
That's a huge leap in logic.
It's like saying if I can justify spanking a child for their wrong actions, it is within the bounds of reason that someone could justify murder for the exact same reasons.
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
Citizens United: Money is a form of free speech.
University of Tampa used their freedom of speech to decide they would no longer be giving money to this professor.
You either defend the principle from all attacks, or you don't. You either believe in the principle, or you don't.
See how this works?
Money is not speech. Money is a medium of exchange.
The SCOTUS disagrees with you, and until they change that position, money as a form of speech is the law of the land.
I agree with Hazardous here. If someone disrespected my wife, they're not going to have a fight, they're going to get a ride to the hospital.
The SCOTUS disagrees with you, and until they change that position, money as a form of speech is the law of the land.
Not really. I thought it was fairly obvious that people who get offended at another's words can and will use a wide variety of violence on them, but I can give you examples if you like.
I'm sure you can, but that does not mean they were justified in their actions/reactions. It's a leap in logic, just as it is to think it's reasonable to murder someone for being offended, whether they think it was justified or not.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: burdman30ott6
I agree with Hazardous here. If someone disrespected my wife, they're not going to have a fight, they're going to get a ride to the hospital.
That's the case with most people. Censorship is a default setting. So you find yourself in good company.
Respect isn't censorship, it's essential civility and tact. It is the same reason most countries have laws lifting expectations of protection for those using fighting words or shouting fire in a theater. If someone disrespects me, I will take measures to ensure they remember the consequences from that disrespect for a long time.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert
Again, you are correct in a philosophical sense, but not in a real world application.
That's the facts of reality. Is it you or words that manipulate your body to act?
Depends on the situation and words used.
If someone came to me with a firearm in hand and said "I can't wait to try this at the range", I would not feel compelled to act.
If someone came to me with a firearm in hand and said "I'm going to kill you", those words would compel me to act, unless I am a chicken#.
Again, you are conflating the philosophical with reality.
While you are correct in one aspect, you are
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert
I'm sure you can, but that does not mean they were justified in their actions/reactions. It's a leap in logic, just as it is to think it's reasonable to murder someone for being offended, whether they think it was justified or not.
I applies the same logic, just taken to its extreme.