461–470 of 480 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wtf since when do presidents give book reviews?
He probably read it to see what all the fuss was about. I did. Its not a good book. Rushdie is a fucking boring writer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trans people largely dont want to be "sexual" around children. The problem is that you are conflating a performance art (drag) with an entire demographic of people (trans people). Do you actually think trans people are sexually assaulting kids or do you just perceive them existing in society as an assault? Why are trans topics in education bad if they describe the lived experience of your neighbors? I don't genuinely…
I've never done anything negative to a trans person in my life so not sure what you mean by I won't leave them alone. Unless you think having a calm conversation and exchange of ideas on HN is harassment. As far as "The way you live your life and your opinions around what to teach kids about gender are a cultural choice." Yup, and as a parent I make choices for my kids every day based on what I think is right for the…
> I very much don't want my kids to be trans as it's a much harder life.
How cowardly. Why do you think its a harder life? Might it be because trans people are hated by society? Might that be because people continue to perpetuate myths that they are corrupting education?
> That's my preference
then dont teach my kids that there is only one way to live your life. Do you also want your kids to reach 18 and be surprised by the existence of trans people when they finally leave your shelter? How do you think they'll react after being taught that "boys should be boys"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes that is why the civil rights law in California was almost repealed last year, they wanted to make it legal to discriminate against white people. Such moronic thinking does not consider the future consequences. Law by teenagers.
"Almost" is not true. Did someone drop a bill in the legislature? Maybe. Did it even make it out of committee? Where are you getting this? "Almost" is doing a lot of work. If your source was AM radio or Fox News don't bother to reply. Leginfo only, please.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've never done anything negative to a trans person in my life so not sure what you mean by I won't leave them alone. Unless you think having a calm conversation and exchange of ideas on HN is harassment. As far as "The way you live your life and your opinions around what to teach kids about gender are a cultural choice." Yup, and as a parent I make choices for my kids every day based on what I think is right for the…
there isnt like a trans spokesperson. Individual trans people arent responsible for every bad event you attribute to them. I'm sure trans people will agree with you on isolated cases but others might reject bad-faith characterizations of drag overall. Also i don't know what you mean about "lying to parents". > I very much don't want my kids to be trans as it's a much harder life. How cowardly. Why do you think its a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Only if you believe that no one has ever changed their behavior after recieving a death threat. That is weakness and the 2nd amendment is a tool to fight back and secure ones self against death threats. Get strapped, stand up and say "try it mother fucker". Defy your oppressor, or be crushed under their tyranny.
responding with violence is also "being affected by words". It also enforces the point that words can incite violence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The important thing is that you're here to tell us what everybody else is saying. The ironic thing is that nobody can be certain what you're saying.
Oh, I think you understand me just fine.
The thing is, people on the far left and the far right DON’T want a liberal society. They want authoritarianism. They want control to suppress their adversaries.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a lot of experience with physical violence. The Brandenburg criteria of specificity and imminence are useful legal yardsticks, but they also assume every set of circumstances is isolated from everything else and can can considered independently, almost in a social vacuum. This is partly the outcome of the Anglo-American legal tradition and the reductive philosophical approach it uses. It's less clear cut in th…
Much of this discourse at present is purely strategic, and often wildly disingenuous. Many people who speak in lofty terms about free speech (not specifying anyone in particular here) are notably silent when it comes to people harrassing librarians or allegations that drag shows = groomers + pedophilia and therefore are legitimate targets for physical or terroristic violence (bomb threats and the like that are suffic…
On the other hand, you can't have your liberal, intellectual society if you allow people to go around making credible threats of violence, which are "just speech" if you subscribe to the speech-is-speech, violence-is-violence approach. If you have to wait until the threat is realized, then any group capable of having members take the punishment for individual acts of violence can grant credibility to making threats t…
> The question is simply where the line gets drawn. And that's one which people who consider themselves ardent defenders of free speech frequently miss. I mean, the linked article concludes with a quote insisting that people's speech should "stop short of demanding that the offender be punished or required to make restitution"... earlier in the piece the same author is quoted criticising "campaigns of vilification" a…
Judging people based on the content of their speech is one thing, but judging people on their willingness to even listen to offensive speech is another