Danish Politician Convicted of Racism For Offending Muslims

[grumbler]

This is one degree removed from thoughtcrime, makes a mockery of the idea of freedom of conscience, and is only relatively benign insofar as the bullying is pointed at people you don't like. I submit to you that you would disapprove quite harshly if precisely the same tactic were used against groups you don't disapprove of--that is, you would disapprove of the tactic itself, not just that the gun was aimed at the wrong people. Say if the thing were reversed, and anyone voicing approval of Islam or Islamic immigrants faced boycotts and ostracism?

It's kinda sad that you should even have to make this argument. I kinda thought Voltaire had won the day, at one point. "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

[Elok]

The funny thing is, I don't even believe in natural rights--I recall we differ on that, Grumbler. But my certainty that they only exist as things we've agreed to guarantee makes me doubly hostile to attempts to run around them. I don't feel that something inviolate is being destroyed, but rather that a frail but important piece of social protection, enacted only with tremendous and sustained effort, is being torn down for the sake of a temporary, evanescent, and ultimately illusory gain. There's a growing tendency within contemporary liberalism to believe in grossly illiberal behaviors, provided they are used to pursue ideologically acceptable ends.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

I'm just a monkery and drunk

it woulf take me forevefr to spell heck all that s*

nice job!


edit - MHLC complained - you druinken posted in my thread. I saifd something nice... NVE JOB!

no threafd drift.... no cut downs.... jusyt a monmkeys face saying nice.

[giblets]

This is one degree removed from thoughtcrime, makes a mockery of the idea of freedom of conscience, and is only relatively benign insofar as the bullying is pointed at people you don't like. I submit to you that you would disapprove quite harshly if precisely the same tactic were used against groups you don't disapprove of--that is, you would disapprove of the tactic itself, not just that the gun was aimed at the wrong people. Say if the thing were reversed, and anyone voicing approval of Islam or Islamic immigrants faced boycotts and ostracism?

I wouldn't want to associate with someone who makes death threats, so why should I associate with someone who threatens the humanity of blacks or muslims or gays?

[My Wife Hates CIV]

oh my. what can be said. dang... this world is what we're leaving the kids.

and they are growing up watching us!

wow... we're doomed

[Sava]

don't think so much about it

smoke some weed

[Elok]

I wouldn't want to associate with someone who makes death threats, so why should I associate with someone who threatens the humanity of blacks or muslims or gays?

I guess that depends on what you mean by "threatens the humanity." I fully expect this politician to suffer at the polls, or for people to try and hurt him there, because he's a politician. His job is to tell people what they want to hear from him, and he has done poorly with at least some of them. If he were a private citizen, or even a celebrity, I would not see the need to punish him for having douchey or hateful opinions. Because they would be irrelevant. The comparison to death threats is invalid; if you call someone at night and threaten to dump his body in the river, he has reasonable cause to fear for his life. Harm done. If, OTOH, the dude down the street puts up a tweet complaining about Muslims taking over the world, you (a hypothetical Muslim you) have no cause to fear, only to feel unwelcome. Being an ******* is not a crime. And what you're doing is both pathologizing dissent and claiming that you have the right to threaten someone else's livelihood and well-being for having opinions out of step with the majority's. Assuming that by "associate with" you mean "do business with."

[Sava]

where's aahz when u need him

[grumbler]

where's aahz when u need him

Poasting in anouther thrade.

[giblets]

I guess that depends on what you mean by "threatens the humanity." I fully expect this politician to suffer at the polls, or for people to try and hurt him there, because he's a politician. His job is to tell people what they want to hear from him, and he has done poorly with at least some of them. If he were a private citizen, or even a celebrity, I would not see the need to punish him for having douchey or hateful opinions. Because they would be irrelevant. The comparison to death threats is invalid; if you call someone at night and threaten to dump his body in the river, he has reasonable cause to fear for his life. Harm done. If, OTOH, the dude down the street puts up a tweet complaining about Muslims taking over the world, you (a hypothetical Muslim you) have no cause to fear, only to feel unwelcome. Being an ******* is not a crime. And what you're doing is both pathologizing dissent and claiming that you have the right to threaten someone else's livelihood and well-being for having opinions out of step with the majority's. Assuming that by "associate with" you mean "do business with."

Bigotry causes enormous harm if it's not contained. It can spread more easily if people treat it like it's on the normal spectrum of opinions and outspoken bigots aren't socially ostracized. Racists have done far more harm to the livelihood and well-being of black people than society has ever done to racists. Ditto for homophobes and homosexuals. **** you for defending them. Yes, you are defending them.

[Sava]

yeah, elok is a well known **** stain too

hiding behind his religious beliefs also

making him an extra scumbag

[Elok]

I think most of the harm racists do is in the form of stuff like hanging, whipping, raping, enslaving, imprisoning, beating, robbing, and the like. Feel free to penalize them for that stuff. If we're doing well enough that expressing an ugly opinion on the intertubes registers as "harm," I'd say we've got things under control.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

hmmm I feel the most harm racists do is pass the hate along to the next generation. and they always seem to have so many kids.

[giblets]

I think most of the harm racists do is in the form of stuff like hanging, whipping, raping, enslaving, imprisoning, beating, robbing, and the like. Feel free to penalize them for that stuff. If we're doing well enough that expressing an ugly opinion on the intertubes registers as "harm," I'd say we've got things under control.

Oh, if they only deny housing and employment to black people then I guess it's not a big deal.

[Elok]

You can penalize those too. My "etc" covers most anything but thinking and talking, because the very act of penalizing those creates a license to shut down open discussion, and that license has far more potential to harm than anybody's stupid tweet.