This Anti-PC war has got to stop

originally posted by: HUMBLEONE
Here my idea, if you say anything with the intent of hurting someone, you are a douchebag! Forget PC. Just try not to hurt anyone else. If we ALL did this, the world would be GROOVY!

The flip side of this is that people need to stop looking for reason to be hurt by what someone says too. For example, the odious dog whistle and victim mentality that actively parses anything anyone says looking for a reason to be upset about it has got to go.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: ClovenSky
So you want to stop free speech? You want to restrict what someone says because of how YOU react to those sound vibrations?

I do. I am so sick of the Free Speech crap.

Expressing yourself and your opinions is one thing.

Being rude, offensive, disgusting, bigoted, etc -- is another - - and using Free Speech in that context is just an excuse.

Who decides what is offensive, disgusting, bigoted, etc? I'm confident in saying that everyone in this thread has varying thresholds.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: ClovenSky

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: ClovenSky

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: ClovenSky
So you want to stop free speech? You want to restrict what someone says because of how YOU react to those sound vibrations?

I do. I am so sick of the Free Speech crap.

Expressing yourself and your opinions is one thing.

Being rude, offensive, disgusting, bigoted, etc -- is another - - and using Free Speech in that context is just an excuse.

Wow, so where do you draw the line? I guess this could be a troll reply but I didn't see the /sarc tag.

How about the old fashion: "Do unto others . . . "

No, it was not sarcasm. I do not support the excuse of Free Speech to be hateful, rude, condemning, bigoted, etc.

So who gets to decide what is hateful, rude, condemning speech? You? Trump?

More extremism.

I'm atheist.

No it's a valid question. Answer please?

I have answered it. I am not responsible for accommodating your criteria for valid.

Rude, obnoxious, bigot, etc, etc, etc - - are all self explanatory - - there is no side.

Forcing those sentiments in the name of Free Speech is an excuse and extremism. It stands on its own.

No, you still havent answered the question.

Who gets to decide what is hateful, rude, condemning speech? You? Trump?

Like I said, I am not required to appease your criteria for valid.

Rude, Obnoxious, Bigot - - - stand on their own. They self describe.

So in your ideal world of limiting people's speach to eliminate bigot speach, hatred speach, or offensive speach.........
If I said something to you that you found to be offensive, yet I thought it not to be. Who decides if I am right or if you are right?

Do you take it to court and let a judge decide?( wouldn't that be hilarious)

Can you imagine the lines of people outside the courthouse? Half the town would ne there waiting to get in to see the judge....ARGUING with each other! HAHAHAHA!

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: BubbaJoe

You are absolutely correct, I have no right to tell you what you can or can't say, but you have no right to tell me that I cannot call you a racist, a bigot, or a mysogynistic asshat for saying it. Amazing how that freedom of speech works.

Name-calling is the lowest form of argument. It puts you on the same tier as those who you indignantly oppose.

They taught us how to handle that in preschool many years ago.

Just remember. ' i'm rubber their glue. Whatever they say bounces off of me, and sticks to them'.

a reply to: Teikiatsu

Her name offends me. "Annee" eeeewwww seriously it is self evident isn't it?

It is self evident to me. I think speaking her name shoild be banned I feel so violated right now.

a reply to: BubbaJoe

I would agree, but the people making racists remarks, are doing nothing more than name calling.

That's the point. That's why we avoid doing the same thing. It's best to show them why they are wrong.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: HUMBLEONE
Here my idea, if you say anything with the intent of hurting someone, you are a douchebag! Forget PC. Just try not to hurt anyone else. If we ALL did this, the world would be GROOVY!

The flip side of this is that people need to stop looking for reason to be hurt by what someone says too. For example, the odious dog whistle and victim mentality that actively parses anything anyone says looking for a reason to be upset about it has got to go.

I think there are a few, but not most of us, that wake up in the morning wondering what can I find to offend me today. I would agree with the anti-PC crowd that this group of folks want to go through life being nothing more than a victim. Just as the racism needs to end, the constant victimization needs to end as well.

a reply to: Teikiatsu

Did you see how many stars that post got?

I am literally shocked.

Ignorance is running amuck on ATS these days.

originally posted by: Annee
Like I said, I am not required to appease your criteria for valid.

Rude, Obnoxious, Bigot - - - stand on their own. They self describe.

Actually, you kind of are required to do so, if you wish to be taken seriously.

"Rude, obnoxious and bigoted" cover a wide spectrum of potential views.

originally posted by: Alien Abduct
a reply to: Teikiatsu

Did you see how many stars that post got?

I am literally shocked.

Ignorance is running amuck on ATS these days.

I believe her comment, "being sick of free speech", referred to the constant regurgitation of the phrase by people that are just as guilty as anyone else of trying to stifle free speech.

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: ClovenSky

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: ClovenSky

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: ClovenSky
So you want to stop free speech? You want to restrict what someone says because of how YOU react to those sound vibrations?

I do. I am so sick of the Free Speech crap.

Expressing yourself and your opinions is one thing.

Being rude, offensive, disgusting, bigoted, etc -- is another - - and using Free Speech in that context is just an excuse.

Wow, so where do you draw the line? I guess this could be a troll reply but I didn't see the /sarc tag.

How about the old fashion: "Do unto others . . . "

No, it was not sarcasm. I do not support the excuse of Free Speech to be hateful, rude, condemning, bigoted, etc.

So who gets to decide what is hateful, rude, condemning speech? You? Trump?

More extremism.

I'm atheist.

No it's a valid question. Answer please?

I have answered it. I am not responsible for accommodating your criteria for valid.

Rude, obnoxious, bigot, etc, etc, etc - - are all self explanatory - - there is no side.

Forcing those sentiments in the name of Free Speech is an excuse and extremism. It stands on its own.

No, you still havent answered the question.

Who gets to decide what is hateful, rude, condemning speech? You? Trump?

Like I said, I am not required to appease your criteria for valid.

Rude, Obnoxious, Bigot - - - stand on their own. They self describe.

So in your ideal world of limiting people's speach to eliminate bigot speach, hatred speach, or offensive speach.........
If I said something to you that you found to be offensive, yet I thought it not to be. Who decides if I am right or if you are right?

Do you take it to court and let a judge decide?

Abuse of Free Speech. I consider claiming Free Speech to say anything you want an excuse.

I don't think that's what Free Speech means or was ever intended to mean.

That's it.

I hope generations to come can evolve beyond this.

Legal action would require actions of harm, which is already covered with Slander, Libel, and other.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: BubbaJoe

I would agree, but the people making racists remarks, are doing nothing more than name calling.

That's the point. That's why we avoid doing the same thing. It's best to show them why they are wrong.

I will revert to an above quote by Ron White, "You can't fix stupid". Please enlighten me, how do you show someone that, not all black women are welfare queens, or that all Mexicans are not illegal? The less enlightened fully believe all of the stereotypes that have been placed out there, I am honestly not sure what the answer is.

a reply to: Alien Abduct

They do that in Canada. Sounds like fun doesn't it?

a reply to: Annee

I don't think that's what Free Speech means or was ever intended to mean.

We have the founding fathers to thank for free speech because it was taboo to criticize the British crown.

Funny thing that we have a bunch of modern day red coats acting to save the current crown.

Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Gotta love the founders.

Dissenting before dissent got cool.

originally posted by: Dark Ghost

originally posted by: Annee
Like I said, I am not required to appease your criteria for valid.

Rude, Obnoxious, Bigot - - - stand on their own. They self describe.

Actually, you kind of are required to do so, if you wish to be taken seriously.

"Rude, obnoxious and bigoted" cover a wide spectrum of potential views.

I don't know... if one was ever taught manners by a parent, I think you could use that as a guideline. I suppose there may be some here who weren't raised by parents who taught them manners.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Alien Abduct

They do that in Canada. Sounds like fun doesn't it?

Apparently that is a thing in Europe as well, not a fan. Hate speech has always been protected here in the USA under the first, not sure it applies in interpersonal relationships.

a reply to: ketsuko

I like your avatar. Everyone I don't like is Hitler. lol. Kind of sums it up nicely. Or anyone who disagrees with me is [insert favoured insult here] [or just use all of them].

originally posted by: BubbaJoe
I will revert to an above quote by Ron White, "You can't fix stupid". Please enlighten me, how do you show someone that, not all black women are welfare queens, or that all Mexicans are not illegal? The less enlightened fully believe all of the stereotypes that have been placed out there, I am honestly not sure what the answer is.

The same way you can't convince others that not all white people are privileged, or that not all Jews are wealthy. Stereotypes exist for all groups of people, not just minorities. Nonetheless, the "less enlightened" should be allowed to believe in stereotypes and should be free to express their views, even if many don't agree with them.

You can't regulate how people think, but you can regulate how they act.

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Dark Ghost

originally posted by: Annee
Like I said, I am not required to appease your criteria for valid.

Rude, Obnoxious, Bigot - - - stand on their own. They self describe.

Actually, you kind of are required to do so, if you wish to be taken seriously.

"Rude, obnoxious and bigoted" cover a wide spectrum of potential views.

I don't know... if one was ever taught manners by a parent, I think you could use that as a guideline. I suppose there may be some here who weren't raised by parents who taught them manners.

Well then if people were taught manners.

People wouldn't be going around calling others 'racist'.

originally posted by: Dark Ghost

originally posted by: Annee
Like I said, I am not required to appease your criteria for valid.

Rude, Obnoxious, Bigot - - - stand on their own. They self describe.

Actually, you kind of are required to do so, if you wish to be taken seriously.

"Rude, obnoxious and bigoted" cover a wide spectrum of potential views.

NO. I am not required to appease another who has differing opinions.

I stand by what I said.

If you want to argue - - Rude, obnoxious, bigoted, etc - - - can have multiple definitions - go for it.