- cross-posted to:
- politics
- cross-posted to:
- politics
You must log in or register to comment.
Not my tree. Not my ornaments. Not in good taste,
Ok, even IF that’s true (and I’m pressing x to doubt), he STILL FUCKING POSTED IT. I don’t see how it makes any difference whatsoever if it was his tree or not. He’s encouraging violence, again. Lock him the fuck back up!
Jail him for thoughtcrime…
I’m gonna go with that being not a great idea. Not because of any merit to the dude being a douche, but simply because the definition of what is considered thoughtcrime can easily end up putting you, me, or anyone else in jail.
At the extreme end of the scale, for example, your logic could make homosexuality criminal… That’s already been successfully used as the premise for prolific book bans, and it’s not exactly a massive stretch to criminalize certain behaviors along the same lines.
“Being an asshole” is wildly subjective and therefore not a good premise for prosecution.
You are defending people that portray their political opponents hanging by a noose after a mob stormed the capitol and tried to kill members of congress in that very fashion. That’s what you’re doing.
What a breathtakingly stupid take on inciting violence and stochastic terrorism.
Generally speaking, it’s easy to differentiate free speech advocates from Nazis and Fascist “free speech” absolutists.
You’re clearly in the latter group, and are fooling no one.
Expressing concern about imagined book bans and criminalisation of sexual deviancy to defend a group notorious for openly banning books and criminalising sexual deviancy?
It’s a bold move… but a silly one.
Threatening or harassing specific people is a crime. Always has been.
