Another Christian Terrorist for Rape

Darla said:
The guy is not an idiot and the sign is not idiotic.

Very poor choice of words, but I know that Soc started that. Very minimizing.

Hey, as long as you get something to feel good about, that's what matters.
Click to expand...

You dont belvie that this guy should not have the freedom to say such horrific things? I personaly belvie in the 1st Amendment, with limits, but unless his words are going to insite crime... It should be legal.
 
He has the right to say it on a street corner. He has no right to bring that sign into his office if he had a job. A college campus is somewhere between those two places. Do I think that kind of hate speech and pro rape propaganda should be allowed in a school? You bet I don't.

A court could and maybe even likely would disagree with me. But women can talk a out it. Men don't get the final say. Soc is not god. And this is far more serious than some feminist being offended
 
Jarod said:
You dont belvie that this guy should not have the freedom to say such horrific things? I personaly belvie in the 1st Amendment, with limits, but unless his words are going to insite crime... It should be legal.
Click to expand...

To some degree he is encouraging crime. The way he states it, he is saying that some women should be raped.

He is testing the limits. Would it be ok if I held a sign stating that he deserves to die?
 
Saxton, a junior studying classics and religious studies, said his sermon was meant to convey that “if you dress like a whore, act like a whore, you’re probably going to get raped.”
“I think that girls that dress and act like it,” Saxton said, “they should realize that they do have partial responsibility, because I believe that they’re pretty much asking for it.”

I'm kinda glad this sick freak showed who he really was. The women on campus will be giving him a wide berth and everyone will learn what really goes on in his pseudo-religious brain.
 
Darla said:
No, rape has nothing to do with whether or not a man can get laid. Rapists don't rape because they are just soooo horny and don't know how to date (if that were the case SF would be in prison). Rapists rape because they enjoy controlling and humiliating women. That's what they get off on, so a yes isn't much fun for them.
Click to expand...
I'd disagree with that. I'd say rapist simply enjoy hurting women. The control and humiliation is just part of hurting them.
 
Darla said:
Sometimes Jarod, you're really an idiot.

Good for AU for letting him make his point. LOL

Moron.
Click to expand...
You prove my point so quickly. Watch her folks, she'll turn on you on a dime. Just say that free speech on a publicly funded college campus trumps her discomfort from what the moron is saying and whiz bang ZOWEEE! You're a moron too.
 
Sir Digby Chicken Caesar said:
To some degree he is encouraging crime. The way he states it, he is saying that some women should be raped.

He is testing the limits. Would it be ok if I held a sign stating that he deserves to die?
Click to expand...
Unless your sign says some one should kill this guy, then no, it would not meet the burden set in Brandenburg, which is Imminent lawless action. Of course you and Darla can go off somewhere and commiserate about how all us privileged white libertarian men are just part of the patriarchal oppressive society. But while you're there, you should remind her that the white males who set affirmative action into play ended up making white women the greatest single beneficiary of Affirmative Action.
 
Socrtease said:
You prove my point so quickly. Watch her folks, she'll turn on you on a dime. Just say that free speech on a publicly funded college campus trumps her discomfort from what the moron is saying and whiz bang ZOWEEE! You're a moron too.
Click to expand...

Are you trying out for the lead role in a summer stock production of Sunset Blvd?

It's funny when I "turn on Howey" you thanked my post. That makes you a hypocrite. That's something I'm not. I don't defend things I don't believe in no matter who says them. And if I see something I feel is egregious, I say something about it, again, no matter who says it.

You've become a very nasty person. But that's your problem not mine.
 
Socrtease said:
Unless your sign says some one should kill this guy, then no, it would not meet the burden set in Brandenburg, which is Imminent lawless action. Of course you and Darla can go off somewhere and commiserate about how all us privileged white libertarian men are just part of the patriarchal oppressive society. But while you're there, you should remind her that the white males who set affirmative action into play ended up making white women the greatest single beneficiary of Affirmative Action.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. I looked up that case and it was from 1969, and was against Ohio. There are a lot of lawyers in this country Soc, and just because you are one doesn't make you right. After all for every single court case in this country, every single day, a lawyer loses their case.
 
Socrtease said:
Unless your sign says some one should kill this guy, then no, it would not meet the burden set in Brandenburg, which is Imminent lawless action. Of course you and Darla can go off somewhere and commiserate about how all us privileged white libertarian men are just part of the patriarchal oppressive society. But while you're there, you should remind her that the white males who set affirmative action into play ended up making white women the greatest single beneficiary of Affirmative Action.
Click to expand...

Your comment about AA is a stunning example of white male supremacist thinking. White males did not "set AA into play". Anymore than white males set civil rights into play. Or women's suffrage.

Blacks set "AA into play" with years of their blood, sweat and tears, and that is fucking literally. YEah a white dude had to sign it into law, guess why? That's right, only white dudes were in power then. No white man ever gave rights to blacks or women. Blacks and women fought for them, died for them, and won them.

I cannot even believe anyone who presents themselves as being smart could make that statement. But it was a telling one. You're lucky BAC doesn't see that one.
 
Darla said:
Are you trying out for the lead role in a summer stock production of Sunset Blvd?

It's funny when I "turn on Howey" you thanked my post. That makes you a hypocrite. That's something I'm not. I don't defend things I don't believe in no matter who says them. And if I see something I feel is egregious, I say something about it, again, no matter who says it.

You've become a very nasty person. But that's your problem not mine.
Click to expand...
No, I can agree with you when you are right. And when you say something I disagree with I don't get personal, UNTIL you do. You think that because I said they guy should be allowed to stay and let people see what he thinks that I approve? That it adds to an atmosphere of fear? You ever read about the marketplace of ideas, and why free speech is so vital?
 
Darla said:
Your comment about AA is a stunning example of white male supremacist thinking. White males did not "set AA into play". Anymore than white males set civil rights into play. Or women's suffrage.

Blacks set "AA into play" with years of their blood, sweat and tears, and that is fucking literally. YEah a white dude had to sign it into law, guess why? That's right, only white dudes were in power then. No white man ever gave rights to blacks or women. Blacks and women fought for them, died for them, and won them.

I cannot even believe anyone who presents themselves as being smart could make that statement. But it was a telling one. You're lucky BAC doesn't see that one.
Click to expand...
Your spitting hairs, but your right, black people died, so did white people for civil rights, but if the white guys who were in power didn't pass the laws it would have just kept going. But a great deal of white people who DID have the power saw the justice in it, and without them it would not be. And yes, god forbid someone who thinks that the WTC was brought down by GWB and co might see this and say something to me. The horror, all the humanity the horror.
 
Socrtease said:
No, I can agree with you when you are right. And when you say something I disagree with I don't get personal, UNTIL you do. You think that because I said they guy should be allowed to stay and let people see what he thinks that I approve? That it adds to an atmosphere of fear? You ever read about the marketplace of ideas, and why free speech is so vital?
Click to expand...

Right, if you agree with me when I "turn on" a liberal, it's all good, if you don't, then I am someone who others have to be warned to "watch". That makes you a hypocrite.

Soc, I could give a shit about your whining, seriously. I knew your first post was aimed at me and so do you. If "getting personal" means saying that your knee jerk reaction to this was from the viewpoint of a white male, great, go with that. IMO you got nasty, but I don't care. YOu can have the last word. Frankly the last thing I need here is to read yet another whiny dude with a chip on his shoulder. If you weren't a mod I'd put you on IA just because it's so boring. But they don't let you do that, so whatever. Have fun. Get your outrage on hon! Work it.
 
Socrtease said:
Give it a rest. One person holding a sign like that does not create a pro-rape atmosphere any more than allowing anti-war protesters creates a pacifist atmosphere. You are another that has proven that freedom for you is subjective, if you are offended by something or don't agree then it shouldn't be protected by the first amendment. The ACLU has defended Neo-Nazis and KKK members right to free speech. Do you think that means they agree or want to promote a pro-racist atmosphere. You think that because you are a woman you can make stupid comments like that and no one will call you on it.
Click to expand...

In the UK, all fireworks have a warning "light blue touch paper and retire to a safe distance". It's a bit like that with Darla.
 
Darla said:
Right, if you agree with me when I "turn on" a liberal, it's all good, if you don't, then I am someone who others have to be warned to "watch". That makes you a hypocrite.

Soc, I could give a shit about your whining, seriously. I knew your first post was aimed at me and so do you. If "getting personal" means saying that your knee jerk reaction to this was from the viewpoint of a white male, great, go with that. IMO you got nasty, but I don't care. YOu can have the last word. Frankly the last thing I need here is to read yet another whiny dude with a chip on his shoulder. If you weren't a mod I'd put you on IA just because it's so boring. But they don't let you do that, so whatever. Have fun. Get your outrage on hon! Work it.
Click to expand...
You're pretty full of yourself aren't you? My first post wasn't made with you in mind at all. When it comes to free speech, that is pretty much who I am. It is how I was trained by some pretty liberal professors both at the undergrad and law school levels. I truly believe that unless what someone says poses an imminent danger of lawless action, or the simpler clear and present danger of shouting fire in a crowded theater, they should be allowed to say it. I have confronted some of the most vile people directly in the form of the Westboro Baptist Church. I lived next door to them. They used to hold signs that said "Ryan White burns in hell." That was one of the most offensive things I have ever seen anyone say about a child who died of a disease that he had no culpability in getting. But if someone had attempted to silence them through legal action, I would have helped them in their legal case (not that they would have let me). I would have defended their right to be the vile ignorant fucktards they are. None of us have the right to stop someone from saying what they believe, ever.
 
Darla said:
Bullshit. I looked up that case and it was from 1969, and was against Ohio. There are a lot of lawyers in this country Soc, and just because you are one doesn't make you right. After all for every single court case in this country, every single day, a lawyer loses their case.
Click to expand...
Right, but Brandenburg is still the law of the land.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top