Man jailed for racist internet posts.

This is why I love America. This is absolutely ridiculous. People should have a right to dislike others and express their grief. Even if it's gratuitous and offensive.

Before long, it's going to illegal to make fun of fat, skinny, ugly, dumb, and red haired people in the UK too.

 

didn't happen in america.

 

I know. It never would. It's why I love America.

 

You mean like supporting jurisprudence to force people to hide their feelings about people they dislike? Offensive words should be countered with jail sentences?

 

It's more like defending the right to open dialogue. Once you start restricting what is allowed in the dialogue, you merely stop an honest conversation.

 

Liberals can't see the difference. They support an authoritarian solution to this.

 

people have the right to speak their mind - but when they engage in hate speech that encourages people to victimise people on the basis of race, religion or culture - then that needs to be addressed.

I would not want people to be encouraged to attack me because of my race, religion, culture or politics, and I doubt that anyone else would.

anyone who thinks that freedom of speech is about protecting incitement to violence is (*)(*)(*)(*)ed in the head.

 

The man was simply an eccentric soccer fan. He was hardly inciting violence.

I seriously doubt anyone in here disagrees with this.

 

That's exactly what he was doing, he has a long history of it, he had only just got out of prison a few days before.

In Britain we don't describe people who slash their pregnant girlfriends with a machete "eccentric".

 

Maybe you feel you did not misrepesent me but you did. Also you certainly slandering me and suggesting I was lying, and much, much more mud was slung with me as a target, none of it true. None of it backed up with a shred of evidence. I do have some evdience to support my contentions. Lets revisit the offending comments? I will bold the misreps and deceptions. If I am mistaken in error please let me know. But maybe we should begin another thread so as not to derail this one.

Deception,; it was not at trick but actually a minor praise. The reason I did not provide the entire quote (which was rare for me) was for clarity. I was only referencing that one comment/idea.

Insult and misrepresenting my character. I was not showing my true colors because I mistakenly thought you made the post. And in any case I was lightly complimenting you.

I was not deliberately misrepresenting anything. Again I thought it was your quote, you by not acknowledging my attempts at correction and appeasement demonstrates willful slander and deception. Or more likely you were angry with me and it was revenge. Which was it Cass?

There is no reason to critique your other replies where you continue to criticize and slander what I said even after I explained that I made a mistake that the balls reference(s) were an analogy, all of them. In addition I apologized! And clarified and corrected. Even now you are taking shots at me! Ha ha~ No, I better not say you have a pit bull tenacity! That too may be twisted either by mistake or intentionally.

I will say that I am starting to beleive you really did think I was/am that awful. That stings a bit. I go to lenghts others do not to post disclaimers etc so as to show that I know most atheists are good moral people! And that a hand full of MAs are the trouble, just like in Christanity ie AOG. However for what? I might as well do as others and lump all atheists together etc.

Subjective statement. Some are some aren’t. If you were really saying haters especially violent haters are repulsive I agree. Israel haters white protestant men or Baptist haters, black haters etc~

Again I disagree. The statement is so subjective as to be vague and almost not defendable. I wish you would say something I could agree with. I will agree that a Klansman hiding behind a tree with a bunch of others throwing flaming motif cocktails at someone’s house is cowardly and repulsive. Those kinds of acts are abhorrent, we all know that. However if one has the ability to strip the emotion away from the decision making it does take courage to be a racist because they are so hated, IMO, and rightly so.

Ok

Yes by continuing to attack me even after I told you I made a mistake, slandering me and suggesting all sorts of nasty things. To my way of thinking that is both hysterical and evil. (even if its mildly so which I think I said somewhere).

How so? I post a lot of stuff, and I did think it was out of chartare for you! However I was complimenting you not on being racist but having the courage to say you were! Why if I were being deceptive and malicious would I compliment you? I am saying again it was an honest mistake and I TRULY sorry if I made you angry or harmed you in any way by that post! We disagree on nearly everything but I have nothing personal against you.

There are many flavors of Christians. I do not misrepresent myself as a fundamentalist traditional Christian and have said so many times that my keypad types it by itself. In my intro and probably a hundred more times I said I can best be described as a open theist Christian with an agnostic spin. I have said the reason I do not preach even though I was sponsored and ordained was because I have issues, not doubts but questions about some scripture, so I serve God by my humanitarian mission, most of this is public record if anyone wants to check.

Anyway I sincerely hope that is the end of this and hope that you accept my apology and explanation.

Rev A

 

I'm fairly sure most Americans will agree with me that would be considered a violent crime.

 

The law of the land is that one can not yell fire in a crowded theater, as the saying goes. It’s a well known law in the USA. Also there are severe penalties for inciting violence through hate speech! If its a hate crime the punishment is even greater. Free speech is protected but there are limits for better or worse. I wonder how Westborough church gets by with some of the sickening rhetoric they espouse. Did anyone catch the (I think it was MSNBC) program on that church and its pastor?

Rev A

 

"Hope they all die. Simple. Catholic scumbags ha ha."

I don't see anything in here telling anyone to do anything. Since when are opinions directives?

Lets look at his other quote that was deemed prison worthy. "Proud to hate Fenian tattie farmers." Oh my GOD!!! That's abhorrently reprehensible. How could someone say such a thing? I probably have at least 20 comments on my FB with even more scathing remarks about rival teams and their fans. The judge that gave this sentence slapped justice in the face with a fresh 'road apple'.

 

But that wasn't all he wrote was it?

 

It's the best the media could report on. Obviously he wasn't writing too much.

 

Well yes, the media could only report the best, they wouldn't be able to report the worst he said, we have laws about publishing things like that.

 

I see. So the press has been restricted too. No free speech or free press. Sounds like an informative society.

 

It's one law for all in Britain, it would be a bit silly sending someone to prison for publishing something then letting it be printed in every newspaper now wouldn't it?

 

The problem is determining when 'angered' speech crosses over to become criminal hate speech or speech designed to incite violence. At some point it becomes subjective and therein lies the danger.

Rev A

 

Perhaps you can direct me to a better article on this matter. The one I read made no acknowledgements of any of other language.

Bleeps are perfectly acceptable in journalism. Articles are published all the time quoting people's raunchy and/or abusive language without having to spell it out verbatim.

 

Hate speech is simply a coined phrased contrived by the authoritarian liberals that want to police our thoughts.

Crossing the line is when you direct others to kill giving instructions, times, assistance, and reasons. That is when conspiracy charges come into effect. Here in America, police setup stings for people wanting to hire hitman all the time. They can get them saying they want a person killed, but the police don't have a case until the person actually pays money.

 

England is ok. I go round and round sometimes toxically so with a few members here that bash the USA and our gun laws etc. I am really 'anti ALL government', from mildly so to very much so. I believe natural law (sometimes called god given law and rights) trump positive law (mans law). The way I understand the difference for example; murder will always be murder according to natural law, but positive law (mans law) can be written to make murder legal. Hitler never broke a German law after he came to power. He simply wrote laws making torture and murder of Jews legal!

Anyway, I think I understand why our English/UK brothers and sisters do not worry about big brother with his cameras and what many of us in the states feel is a restrictive Orwellian government. Its because they grew up with it their culture is different as is their history. To them less guns and restrictive laws, cameras etc equal safety and is worth the price of reduced freedom. Am I close ? Personally I would rather leave defense to myself not the police and have much less reliance on government. However different strokes eh?

Rev A

 

Yes we are living in a more and more UK like country. Its by design not accident. Hate speech must be subjective at the point it crosses over from legal to illegal speech. Someone has to make that decision. If the decision maker happens to he a leftwing gay rights activist, he or she will probably err on the side of saying its illegal, and vice versa if the 'judge' is a far right wing conservative. Its a difficult situation. Personally I would rather see less or no federal police action applied to individual citizens (what I am calling the police is the CIA FBI NSA ETC). I have lived for some time and have watched the PC police creep into many areas of our lives they have no business in. The worse part is that their power is increasing (the police etc). One bright ray of freedoms sunshine is firearm issues. The SCOUS seems to be on our side. God bless em‘! (for now!)

Rev A

 

I couldn't agree more with what you said here.

I'll agree that's what is the driving force behind this more than likely. I am again in full agreement with less government and more social responsibility.

 

I blame Hollywood and cameras. Pictures are worth a thousand words, but rarely do they tell the actual or whole story.

The SCOTUS might be on our side for now, but half the country still thinks Obama's far-far-left policies are productive and necessary. That is not very promising for America's economic future. Disparity often leads to violence and thievery. That leads to more gun laws.