Hollywood stars demanding the blacklisting of Trump supporters, isn't that totalitarian or fascist?

a reply to: JustJohnny

Uh, abortions actually do kill babies. You should look into it and maybe you'll notice that subtle fact.

a reply to: The2Billies

The public literally does have a right to know who is funding our politicians..

Obviously

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Then why does the extent of your willingness about it stop past complaining about it online??? If I thought my neighbors were gonna kill their 3 year old next Wednesday, I’m kicking the door in..


Why do almost no miscarriages nor abortions have funerals???


Can you purchase life insurance on a fetus??

Why is any pro-lifer friends with a child murderer?!?!
(Aka anyone who has had an abortion)

In a nut shell why doesn’t ANYONE, including the most hard core pro-lifer treat it like it is murder???



There are only really 2 options as I see it..

1) no one thinks is is murder and t is all talk to hype up the sheeple.

2) All pro-lifers are cowards, they really do believe it is murdering babies, but for all the talk are too scared to do anything to protect them besides change complain online..

originally posted by: JustJohnny
Why is any pro-lifer friends with a child murderer?!?!
(Aka anyone who has had an abortion)

No clue on this one, honestly. I've no use for the murders or those who willingly associate with them, but maybe your circle is different.

In a nut shell why doesn’t ANYONE, including the most hard core pro-lifer treat it like it is murder???

Have you not paid attention to the new laws passed in states like Alabama? Those laws explicitly do treat it like murder.

2) All pro-lifers are cowards, they really do believe it is murdering babies, but for all the talk are too scared to do anything to protect them besides change complain online..

Laws are being changed... you seem to believe vigilantism is the measuring stick of morality... You do realize Charles Bronson plays a fictitious character in the Death Wish movies, yes? How would my family be served if I did something dumb and extrajudically acted, getting myself tossed into jail same as if I'd been extrajudically enforcing a present, on the books law?

Oh, and yes, people do have funerals for miscarried babies. www.vox.com...

Life insurance!?!? You're seriously asking why a company that loses money if someone dies and makes money only if the insured outlives a certain length of paying into premiums doesn't offer their services in a country where abortion is legal? Seriously? The hole in your question is so large you could drive a forklift through it.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

So it's legal for the KKK to band together and harass people wherever they want to so long as it's public? Somehow, I think that would be viewed and treated quite a bit differently.

a reply to: JustJohnny

Some pro-lifers do and have and then they're terrorists because they blow up abortion clinics. I know that's what you're salivating over because then all your worst and darkest desires for pro-lifers would be confirmed, but most of us do respect the law, even when it's wrong.

We work to change the law and attitudes, not by waging outright war. We leave that one to ANTIFA for the most part.

a reply to: Krakatoa

The problem is it doesn't really matter what the courts say, if you're on the list and it is made public, the damage is done. The public is very very unforgiving. As an example; do any of you remember the security guard (Richard Jewell) from the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta Georgia? He was falsely accused of the bombing by the FBI. He was the guy that found the backpack and saved the day. He was in fact the hero. He was later exonerated, but the public never seemed to trust him again. He was never able to get employment again (source was from a 60 minutes TV show interview).

1996 Olympic park bombing
60mins Interview Ricard Jewell

Innocent or not, once a claim of something unpopular, distasteful, etc. is public the damage is done.

That's why in politics we have "mud-slinging." Even if it's a lie, you have damaged your opponent in many of the eyes of the public because most of them will believe it no matter what, or at least suspect there may be some truth there.

So, yes you have freedom of speech, but (and this is a big one) not to slander. And you walk a fine line when you call to action to harm others...in most(some) cases when action has been taken it has been found illegal/criminal

My point here, waiting for the court to decide is waiting too long because the court of public opinion has already decided. And really rendered the legal courts decision moot. Just ask Richard Jewell. His life was never the same. He lost is his job, his friends and even his family didn't trust him any more. Poor guy. He was just doing his job, and he is a hero, really, but nobody really trusts him more because he was once falsely accused of being the bomber. FYI, he was publicly exonerated, but it didn't help him.

This same scenario happens to people falsely accused of crimes who are imprisoned, but later found innocent and released. They have a hard time of it.

So I don't like at all what Messing & McCormack are doing. McCarthy was WRONG, and so are they.

It ruins peoples lives; and not just the intended targets, but others too. Family members and relatives or neighbors are affected. Businesses are affected. All of them adversely.

ff

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: The2Billies

This isn't cyberbullying, they aren't directly contacting anyone by email or other means, this is a broad appeal directed at the general public.

So obviously you are ok with a prominent person putting out a list of people they encourage their fans, friends and family to harass day in and day out on the internet and in person.
Ok, I can't argue with someone who believes that is moral, constitutional, legal, and acceptable behavior. I can see you are stuck and nothing I say will change your mind.

So as Iamtat asked: Are you ok with people gathering a list of LGBT teachers, child care workers etc. and publishing the list and have a prominent public figure demand their fans, friends, and family harass these people and demand they be fired and not employed in any schools anywhere? This is EXACTLY the same thing. So in your logic, it is moral, legal, constitutional and acceptable to do?

Let's look at a group as Iamtat said that is not "protected" from harrassment like conservatives. ALANON, let's go to meetings and collect their names and have a prominent TV "Star" encourage fans, friends, and family to harass them, get them fired, and inist no one give them a job. According to your logic, this is moral, constitutional, acceptable behavior?

Perhaps when the prominent person gets sued for it and has to pay millions they will still think it was moral and worthwhile to encourage fans, friends, and family to engage in cyber-bullying and hand them a list of people to bully, based on prejudice and bigotry.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: The2Billies

Hollywood stars demanding the blacklisting of Trump supporters...

Seriously? Do you always make crap up to get faux-outraged about:

Debra Messing:

Please print a list of all attendees please. The public has a right to know.

No call for "blacklisting". Just for outing them as Trump supporters. We could discuss the implications -- good and bad -- of such transparency, but you'll have to walk back your fake news first.

Eric McCormack:

Hey, @THR, kindly report on everyone attending this event, so the rest of us can be clear about who we don't wanna work with. Thx.

Again, just a call for transparency... so that Mr. McCormack (and presumably others) can exercise their RIGHT to freedom of association. If Mr. McCormack chooses not to work with his political enemies, he has that right. No one has to agree or like it, but I will damn sure stand up for EVERYONE'S right to choose who and what they contribute their time, labor and money.

...isn't that totalitarian or fascist?

Nope. Only if/when government does it -- As another illustrious poster has already stated. These two mediocre actors are just individuals speaking for themselves. They are not government officials and have no official power or authority. They're just talking trash.

If anyone is displaying a totalitarian or fascist ideology, it would be YOU for suggesting these two do not have the right to free speech and freedom of association, and/or other associated rights.

So as Iamtat asked: Using your logic.

It is perfectly ok for a TV "star" to gather a list of LGBT teachers and childcare workers. Send the list to fans, family, friends demanding they harass and dox the LGBT teachers. Demanding they call their place of work and that they be fired and demand no one be allowed to hire them. This is the exact same concept. If you approve of one, you must approve of another.

Defining people based on the group they belong to, be it race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or political affiliation - is wrong - doing so is evil - it is pure unadulterated bigotry and prejudice. Unless you think it is ok for liberals to be bigots against those they hate, but wrong for everyone else.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Krakatoa

But do we actually know "why" they are collecting names?

In theory, they couldn't come out and say, "Hi! We want the names of people we want to murder".

They'd have to say something different, wouldn't they?

Good point!!

I was thinking the exact same thing. The list may have encouraged people to go out and kill those on the list, even if that was not the intent, the result could easily happen in this day and age.
At the very least ANTIFA could show up at their homes and beat the crap out of them.

But those who think it is legal, moral and constitutional, would say that is impossible, well it is not, definately not impossible.

originally posted by: fastfred
a reply to: Krakatoa

The problem is it doesn't really matter what the courts say, if you're on the list and it is made public, the damage is done. The public is very very unforgiving. As an example; do any of you remember the security guard (Richard Jewell) from the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta Georgia? He was falsely accused of the bombing by the FBI. He was the guy that found the backpack and saved the day. He was in fact the hero. He was later exonerated, but the public never seemed to trust him again. He was never able to get employment again (source was from a 60 minutes TV show interview).

1996 Olympic park bombing
60mins Interview Ricard Jewell

Innocent or not, once a claim of something unpopular, distasteful, etc. is public the damage is done.

That's why in politics we have "mud-slinging." Even if it's a lie, you have damaged your opponent in many of the eyes of the public because most of them will believe it no matter what, or at least suspect there may be some truth there.

So, yes you have freedom of speech, but (and this is a big one) not to slander. And you walk a fine line when you call to action to harm others...in most(some) cases when action has been taken it has been found illegal/criminal

My point here, waiting for the court to decide is waiting too long because the court of public opinion has already decided. And really rendered the legal courts decision moot. Just ask Richard Jewell. His life was never the same. He lost is his job, his friends and even his family didn't trust him any more. Poor guy. He was just doing his job, and he is a hero, really, but nobody really trusts him more because he was once falsely accused of being the bomber. FYI, he was publicly exonerated, but it didn't help him.

This same scenario happens to people falsely accused of crimes who are imprisoned, but later found innocent and released. They have a hard time of it.

So I don't like at all what Messing & McCormack are doing. McCarthy was WRONG, and so are they.

ff

And that is the point - destroy their lives, ruin their reputations, encourage people to hate them, encourage people to discriminate against them, encourage bigotry and prejudice toward them.

originally posted by: TruthxIsxInxThexMist
a reply to: The2Billies

I can see a lot of lawsuits coming if people don't get work due to political views!

Isn't this prejudice which is what the left fight against?

More hypocrisy from the left.

Yes it is PREJUDICE AND BIGOTRY in full bloom!

Harassing people simply for a single group characteristic (like race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, political affiliation)

a reply to: The2Billies

These people live in a bubble and it makes me lol that they think they have any clout outside of said bubble. Just like De Niro, Madonna and others - they are the social 'pets' of the collective global community whose input into grown-up things that effect the well-being of the collective community is neither respected nor given any degree of seriousness - because emotional feelings cloud a logical mind which limits lateral thinking.

These are the facts.

a reply to: The2Billies

Yes, true that is the point. But it is wrong, we all know it. But I'll skip past that for a second to to a greater wrong which is the collateral damage done by this doxing and harassment. Which is the least actions to be taken when the lists are made available. Even if not made available, they will be leaked intentionally or not, and names will be made known.

When these people are harassed other innocent people also suffer. Where ever they go, be it to a restaurant, a theater, a mall, etc. they get harassed and everyone else around has to also endure this onslaught of verbal abuse that hail forth constantly yelling screaming. Very disruptive if one has to experience it (as it's meant to be). Businesses losing money because of how they deal with it. And it really doesn't matter because no matter what they do someone is going to be upset about it and they will lose business and possible become a new target for harassment. Can you say "Red Hen?" Another restaurant in California got harassed because it has the same name as the one being targeted in Virginia.

Family members and relatives get caught up in it too. Neighbors and co-workers can become victims of this harassment as well.

I'm just against this whole doxing harassment crap. If it isn't already, it should be made a criminal offense to dox people. This includes public servants because their private residents is just that private. Their work place however is not. They are public servants. That is where you protest them. Not at their home where their families or neighbors are affected. And don't ever, ever dox private citizens. Not cool. This anti-doxing goes for everyone, govt, media, etc.

Red Hen restaurant controversy

ff

Hollywood = sexual

Hollywood should be blacklisted.

Bloody idiots.

a reply to: The2Billies

It is perfectly ok for a TV "star" to gather a list of LGBT teachers and childcare workers. Send the list to fans, family, friends demanding they harass and dox the LGBT teachers. Demanding they call their place of work and that they be fired and demand no one be allowed to hire them. This is the exact same concept. If you approve of one, you must approve of another.

Nope. Just making crap up again.

First, neither of these TV "stars" is gathering a list of anyone; they are asking a well known and established news medium to publish a list -- that's called freedom of the press -- of campaign donors -- that's already public info and can be found at the FEC website and OpenSecrets.org.

They have not suggested that they will even send a link to these published reports, much less demand the harassment, doxing, firing or refusal to hire these people. They have only suggested that they themselves will choose not to work with these people. That's freedom of association and freedom of labor.

Nor are these two in any positions of power within the Hollywood hierarchy that could deny anyone work, or force others within the industry to deny them work. They are not the co-presidents of the Screen Actors Guild. They are not producers or casting directors or even studio heads. All they can do is use a bully pulpit to talk trash -- just like you are using this bully pulpit to talk trash.

Defining people based on the group they belong to, be it race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or political affiliation - is wrong - doing so is evil - it is pure unadulterated bigotry and prejudice.

Oh dear lordy... people are defined every day by who they are and there is nothing wrong or evil about it unless who or what they are defined as is wrong or evil. Defining a child sexual predator as a child sexual predator isn't bigotry and prejudice, nor is it wrong or evil. Being a child sexual predator is wrong and evil though!

Defining people as "Black" or "White" or whatever is not the problem; judging people for such things can be a problem. Harassment of anyone is definitely a problem.

Unless you think it is ok for liberals to be bigots against those they hate, but wrong for everyone else.

I don't live in an echo chamber and I don't play the left/right paradigm. And I'm not the one crying about defining people...

originally posted by: and14263
Hollywood = sexual

Hollywood should be blacklisted.

Bloody idiots.

Yep and it's going to look like Europe soon with T&As all over the interwebs. The entertainment biz gives people what they want, so they will watch their 60in TV and buy stuff from the advertisers, like banks and car companies.

It's about money, capitalism and free enterprise in a competitive global market place.

Nobody is forcing anyone to watch the vast wasteland. Blacklist hollywood if you want, but movies, TV series, News, everything is coming from all over the country. Digital has changed everything. Filmmakers are making feature length movies with their damn phones and laptops on their kitchen table.

Hollywood is old school now that anyone with a $400 camera from Amazon, some shop lights from home depot and a few friends can compete with the big studios. It helps to have a good story....

a reply to: The2Billies

I can't remember the exact quote, however it goes something like this:

Regardless of the political system (socialism, communism, totalitarianism, theocracy, etc.) the end goal is all the same. To install a group in power. Once in power, those distinctions of the afore mentioned systems start to disappear. They were never really important anyway. Just a vehicle.

With regards to the Hollywooders you mentioned, they are entitled to their opinion. If it gains any traction has yet to be seen.

Unfortunately, they do not seem to be alone. I wish I understood psychology so I could tell you what it is. I try to avoid labels but these are not Liberals as I understood the term growing up. Are they even on a political spectrum? It appears they just want to silence those they disagree with. And feel righteous doing it. That seems like some disorder not a world view.

Sorry if I derailed here.

originally posted by: raedar
Only have a minute and glanced over the comments and didn’t see it mentioned...

Check out her (Debra Messing) Twitter. She posted a video asking for people to text her so they could actually talk. Top comments suggest it has an auto-reply that asks for your name, date of birth, location so that they can make a list!

Someone please upload screenshots if it doesn’t violate t&c

I’m at work and unable to link or screen AP.

This is kinda scary...

DANGER WILL ROBINSON DANGER!

Great way for ANTIFA to get your name, number, and address if you happen to disagree with liberals!

originally posted by: The2Billies

originally posted by: raedar
Only have a minute and glanced over the comments and didn’t see it mentioned...

Check out her (Debra Messing) Twitter. She posted a video asking for people to text her so they could actually talk. Top comments suggest it has an auto-reply that asks for your name, date of birth, location so that they can make a list!

Someone please upload screenshots if it doesn’t violate t&c

I’m at work and unable to link or screen AP.

This is kinda scary...

DANGER WILL ROBINSON DANGER!

Great way for ANTIFA to get your name, number, and address if you happen to disagree with liberals!

I'm more afraid of some nutcase with an AK 47, shooting up a walmart, beer joint or a movie theater than ANTIFA.