@LadyRhian Your Hitler example is not remotely close to what I've been asking. Hitler was in a place of leadership. Even if he didn't draft anything, EVERY decision on policy still had to go through him. He was DIRECTLY responsible for everything that happened under him. I also don't recall not answering any of your questions, do you wanna state them for me again so I can address them?
So is Trump. So are congressmen like Steve King. As far as I am aware, my posts are all still up. You can look there. I am not going to go back through 3 to 4 pages of posts, but they are there. Look there. I feel like I am being sealioned, and I don't like the sensation.
@smeagolheart Calling for war, to put a pacifist law into effect? That would be hilarious if it weren't disturbing.
Not just war - genocide of all males if the US doesn't submit to sharia er christain law.
That guy has been in reelected 5 terms. I hope the FBI just doesn't do nothing because publishing a manifesto calling for genocide is the first step to actually doing the deed.
@ThacoBell How about people who send out stuff like this: Washington State Rep. Matt Shea recently released a video admitting that he distributed an openly violent screed titled “Biblical Basis for War.” The Freedom From Religion Foundation condemns the document as dangerous and staggeringly hypocritical.
The “Biblical Basis for War” begins with a list of “4 Ways to know its [sic] time to fight,” all of which amount to an unjustified belief that God is on one’s side. Sections such as “Organizational Structure for War” leave no doubt that this is meant to be a guide to literal, not figurative, war.
If this leads to violence, should this guy have no responsibility? No punishment, no payment of fines?
Continued from above: The document specifically contemplates overthrowing “tyranny,” but it quickly defines a “tyrant” as “someone who rules without God.” Thus, it appears to call for violence against any political leader who does not share Shea’s personal religious views. By Shea’s definition, the United States, a secular democracy founded on a godless constitution is tyrannical and meant to be overthrown. As a state legislator, Shea swore an oath to uphold that godless Constitution, whose only references to religion are exclusionary, including a prohibition against religious tests for public office in Article VI.
Most alarming of all, it lists four “options” for “biblically dealing with tyranny,” one of which is “Assassination & Sabotage.” It explains that “Assassination to remove tyrants is just, not murder,” citing a biblical verse that praises “treason,” by name, in overthrowing a non- theocratic government.
Rep. Shea, who reportedly wrote and distributed the manifesto for Christian sharia, defended it in a recent video. With a stunning lack of self-awareness, Shea condemned “Islamists,” apparently unaware that his written plan for a theocratic armed rebellion is identical to the goals of radicalized Islamists, only based on a different book.
Shea’s document promises that martyrs will be rewarded in the afterlife, citing the Old Testament. It also instructs holy warriors to “Make an offer of Peace before declaring war,” demanding total submission to biblical law. If this is refused, the instruction is to “kill all males.” It lists a “Law of Booty” that requires that plunder be given to the “Church & Ministry,” not to the government.
Adding another layer of hypocrisy, the document is openly anti-democratic, stating that “God doesn’t use majorities. The majority is usually wrong.”
@LadyRhian I only asked you to re-state your questions because you demanded I answer them, but when I read over them, I either did not realize something was a question, or that I HAD answered it. But if you actuallly don't care, I'm not going to put in extra effort to re-parse multiple comments over multiple pages.
Though I'm curious where you think I stated that no one should ever be held accountable for their words. All I've been asking if what your anti hate speech law would look like. How would it apply, how would you enforce it, what would be the penalties? Obviously you aren't required to answer anything to anybody here, but why posit a new law that could come in conflict with one of our basic rights, only to refuse to elaborate on what that would look like?
@Balrog99 According to this study from 1996 out of the top 100 most common reasons for hospital treatment and visits, colds are waaaaaaaaay down at number 96. And they are lumped together with general upper respiratory infections, so they are less than even that. By far the most common incidents seem to pregnancy related, or various kinds of infection. Both of which can easily be fatal. I'd say that not going to the hospital is the more irresponsible decision.
In all fairness to myself, I wasn't arguing against those. Sniffles is what I referenced. That would seem to be the upper respiratory thing. I wouldn't complain about being behind a pregnant woman in distress!
Edit: Also, I wasn't really talking about hospital visits but visits to the clinic/primary care physician.
Actually that's a good point. I have always used Hospital as a catch all for doctor's offices and clinics irl. I sometimes forget that they can be different things.
*edit*
I went and tried to find a similar study of clinic and physician visits, and I've had bad luck finding anything. I did find a bunch of lists from various places of the top ten reasons people visit physicians. They don't have the same data behind them (that I can tell, I haven't found the sourcing), but I've seen the same results from about 6 different articles, and they also seem to have similar distribution to the larger study on hospital visits, so they are probably somewhat accurate.
"1 Respiratory: leading respiratory concerns include asthma, bronchitis, sinusitis and other acute infections 2 Circulatory: hypertension or high blood pressure is the leading diagnosis 3 Endocrine: diabetes, metabolic diseases and immunity disorders 4 Musculoskeletal: joint disorders, osteoarthritis and rheumatism 5 Nervous system and sense organs: ear infections, migraines and pink eye 6 Genitourinary: urinary tract (or bladder) infections, menstruation disorders and menopausal issues 7 Mental disorders: attention deficit disorder, depression and anxiety 8 Injury/poison: contusion or bruises, sprains, strains and open wounds 9 Skin and subcutaneous tissue: eczema, cellulitis (bacterial infection of the skin and tissues beneath the skin) and abscesses (collection of pus build-up within the tissue) 10 Infections and parasitic diseases: viral and chlamydial infections and strep sore throat"
@smeagolheart Calling for war, to put a pacifist law into effect? That would be hilarious if it weren't disturbing.
I am reminded of a comment from a hentai webcomic I read regularly.
In the webcomic, a character said "I fight for peace!"
The comment was a meme pic with the text "Fighting for peace is like f-ing for virginity" (I censored the f-word).
Also, that was an amusing, if also disturbing read.
On the list of "Things for a Holy Army" are included circumcision, trumpets (and an ark. Why? Or THE Ark?), and money (and atonement. For needing the money?).
Being scared disqualifies you from military service, because it shows your faith is weak. You probably get stabbed in the back for not being faithful enough later.
Oh hey, an Old Testament reference on why the righteous men go away (I pulled out my bible for it. The direct line is that they are taken away from the evil of the world).
Then there was the organization of the army and the rules of engagement. First, try avoiding bloodshed (good) and make an "offer" (more like demand, it's not a negotiation) of peace before a declaration of war, which has the "no abortions, no gays, no commies, and everyone has to "obey Biblical law" (direct quote mine)" as the terms for peace. Not negotiable. If they don't resist, they have to pay a share of work and taxes. If they do resist, kill all the males.
"A tyrant is someone who rules without God." I'm glad we defined that.
More Old Testament references.
Oh hey, assassination is not murder, it's justice.
What a house of horrors. This was written, in all seriousness, by a serious "Christian"?
And "obey Biblical law"? How is this NOT, NOT just Sharia Law under the banner of another religion?
@LadyRhian I only asked you to re-state your questions because you demanded I answer them, but when I read over them, I either did not realize something was a question, or that I HAD answered it. But if you actuallly don't care, I'm not going to put in extra effort to re-parse multiple comments over multiple pages.
Though I'm curious where you think I stated that no one should ever be held accountable for their words. All I've been asking if what your anti hate speech law would look like. How would it apply, how would you enforce it, what would be the penalties? Obviously you aren't required to answer anything to anybody here, but why posit a new law that could come in conflict with one of our basic rights, only to refuse to elaborate on what that would look like?
I've answered those questions. Multiple times in some cases. But okay, here is it again. When someone is killed or hurt by someone taking your words and using them as a reason to hurt and/or kill a person. I believe there should be some sort of fine. For the more people hurt or killed, the greater the fine, as well as some other means of restitution. That could include having to serve in food kitchens serving the people you spat hate at, or public works like being forced to clean up cans and trash along roads/highways/interstates. I'd also like to see some kind od thing where you get to actually know the people you are hating on- to know them as people.
I've said the above more than once, except about the details on the "other kind of restitution" part, and adding the part about getting to know the people you are hating on. Satisfied now?
@LadyRhian In a word, yes. Thank you. I remember a vague mention of fines before but nothing this in depth, if I missed it I apologise. If you aren't completely sick of this by now, you've clarified the penalty, how would you enforece this? Can anyone point a finger after a crime and say they were inspired by so and so without proof? What would constitute proof? If you are tired of this discussion, you can let me know and I'll drop it.
@smeagolheart Calling for war, to put a pacifist law into effect? That would be hilarious if it weren't disturbing.
I am reminded of a comment from a hentai webcomic I read regularly.
In the webcomic, a character said "I fight for peace!"
The comment was a meme pic with the text "Fighting for peace is like f-ing for virginity" (I censored the f-word).
Also, that was an amusing, if also disturbing read.
On the list of "Things for a Holy Army" are included circumcision, trumpets (and an ark. Why? Or THE Ark?), and money (and atonement. For needing the money?).
Being scared disqualifies you from military service, because it shows your faith is weak. You probably get stabbed in the back for not being faithful enough later.
Oh hey, an Old Testament reference on why the righteous men go away (I pulled out my bible for it. The direct line is that they are taken away from the evil of the world).
Then there was the organization of the army and the rules of engagement. First, try avoiding bloodshed (good) and make an "offer" (more like demand, it's not a negotiation) of peace before a declaration of war, which has the "no abortions, no gays, no commies, and everyone has to "obey Biblical law" (direct quote mine)" as the terms for peace. Not negotiable. If they don't resist, they have to pay a share of work and taxes. If they do resist, kill all the males.
"A tyrant is someone who rules without God." I'm glad we defined that.
More Old Testament references.
Oh hey, assassination is not murder, it's justice.
What a house of horrors. This was written, in all seriousness, by a serious "Christian"?
And "obey Biblical law"? How is this NOT, NOT just Sharia Law under the banner of another religion?
Ok, I read this. It sounds more like a treatise than a manifesto to me; no specifics, no call for action, nothing but a list of Old Testament war tactics in outline form. Ooohhh, scary. Again, much ado about nothing.
@LadyRhian In a word, yes. Thank you. I remember a vague mention of fines before but nothing this in depth, if I missed it I apologise. If you aren't completely sick of this by now, you've clarified the penalty, how would you enforece this? Can anyone point a finger after a crime and say they were inspired by so and so without proof? What would constitute proof? If you are tired of this discussion, you can let me know and I'll drop it.
Ask the person who committed it (if still alive). Check their possessions. If they made statements about why they were doing it, believe them (if they are dead). If you find someone with, say, Mark Shea's screed in their possession when they went in to assassinate someone, and they said they were doing this for reasons contained within such work, using similar or the same words... It would be safe to take them at their words.
There are four men who attempted to bomb a Mosque and apartment building in Kansas in 2016. One of the men's lawyers is essentially arguing for a reduced sentence because the man listened to Trump's hateful speeches. Would it be stupid to argue that Trump was *not* part of the reason for why he and the other men planned such a thing?
Pointing to Trump’s rhetoric, attorneys for Kansas militiaman convicted of mosque bomb plot ask for a more lenient sentence
From the article:During the trial in the spring, prosecutors played back recordings in which Stein described Muslim immigrants as “cockroaches” that needed to be exterminated, and talked about killing Muslims with weapons dipped in pigs' blood. Two months before the conversation took place, The Washington Post’s Abigail Hauslohner noted, Trump had referenced a questionable tale about Gen. John J. Pershing killing Muslims with bullets dipped in pigs' blood.
Nor is Trump the only one implicated: In the sentencing memo, Stein’s attorneys wrote that their client feared Muslims “because of what he learned about them on the internet and the videos he watched on YouTube.” His knowledge of the Koran, they say, “came directly from the internet and conservative talk-show hosts such as Sean Hannity and Michael Savage.”
And... Meanwhile, Trump’s words have found their way into otherwise unrelated court cases. Last week, a man accused of groping another passenger on a Southwest Airlines flight reportedly told authorities that “the President of the United States says it’s okay to grab women by their private parts.”
I also haven't discussed amounts of money, because I think it should be determined by the amount of money you have. If your hateful words have an effect on your bottom line, it would be more of a reason to watch what you say.
What if they got their ideas from books? Or movies? Or watching a documentary on the History Channel? What if it was music that inspired them? All of those have been inspirations for killers in the past. Should we start banning books? Censoring music? Are authors and musicians then to blame when they inspire violence?
What if they got their ideas from books? Or movies? Or watching a documentary on the History Channel? What if it was music that inspired them? All of those have been inspirations for killers in the past. Should we start banning books? Censoring music? Are authors and musicians then to blame when they inspire violence?
No. I'm not up with banning or censoring anything. I'm strictly speaking of "Hate Speech", nothing else.
@smeagolheart Calling for war, to put a pacifist law into effect? That would be hilarious if it weren't disturbing.
I am reminded of a comment from a hentai webcomic I read regularly.
In the webcomic, a character said "I fight for peace!"
The comment was a meme pic with the text "Fighting for peace is like f-ing for virginity" (I censored the f-word).
Also, that was an amusing, if also disturbing read.
On the list of "Things for a Holy Army" are included circumcision, trumpets (and an ark. Why? Or THE Ark?), and money (and atonement. For needing the money?).
Being scared disqualifies you from military service, because it shows your faith is weak. You probably get stabbed in the back for not being faithful enough later.
Oh hey, an Old Testament reference on why the righteous men go away (I pulled out my bible for it. The direct line is that they are taken away from the evil of the world).
Then there was the organization of the army and the rules of engagement. First, try avoiding bloodshed (good) and make an "offer" (more like demand, it's not a negotiation) of peace before a declaration of war, which has the "no abortions, no gays, no commies, and everyone has to "obey Biblical law" (direct quote mine)" as the terms for peace. Not negotiable. If they don't resist, they have to pay a share of work and taxes. If they do resist, kill all the males.
"A tyrant is someone who rules without God." I'm glad we defined that.
More Old Testament references.
Oh hey, assassination is not murder, it's justice.
What a house of horrors. This was written, in all seriousness, by a serious "Christian"?
And "obey Biblical law"? How is this NOT, NOT just Sharia Law under the banner of another religion?
Ok, I read this. It sounds more like a treatise than a manifesto to me; no specifics, no call for action, nothing but a list of Old Testament war tactics in outline form. Ooohhh, scary. Again, much ado about nothing.
Seriously? I wasn't aware that Communists were in the bible.
It is not a treatise on Old Testament war tactics.
@smeagolheart Calling for war, to put a pacifist law into effect? That would be hilarious if it weren't disturbing.
I am reminded of a comment from a hentai webcomic I read regularly.
In the webcomic, a character said "I fight for peace!"
The comment was a meme pic with the text "Fighting for peace is like f-ing for virginity" (I censored the f-word).
Also, that was an amusing, if also disturbing read.
On the list of "Things for a Holy Army" are included circumcision, trumpets (and an ark. Why? Or THE Ark?), and money (and atonement. For needing the money?).
Being scared disqualifies you from military service, because it shows your faith is weak. You probably get stabbed in the back for not being faithful enough later.
Oh hey, an Old Testament reference on why the righteous men go away (I pulled out my bible for it. The direct line is that they are taken away from the evil of the world).
Then there was the organization of the army and the rules of engagement. First, try avoiding bloodshed (good) and make an "offer" (more like demand, it's not a negotiation) of peace before a declaration of war, which has the "no abortions, no gays, no commies, and everyone has to "obey Biblical law" (direct quote mine)" as the terms for peace. Not negotiable. If they don't resist, they have to pay a share of work and taxes. If they do resist, kill all the males.
"A tyrant is someone who rules without God." I'm glad we defined that.
More Old Testament references.
Oh hey, assassination is not murder, it's justice.
What a house of horrors. This was written, in all seriousness, by a serious "Christian"?
And "obey Biblical law"? How is this NOT, NOT just Sharia Law under the banner of another religion?
Ok, I read this. It sounds more like a treatise than a manifesto to me; no specifics, no call for action, nothing but a list of Old Testament war tactics in outline form. Ooohhh, scary. Again, much ado about nothing.
Seriously? I wasn't aware that Communists were in the bible.
It is not a treatise on Old Testament war tactics.
Well, considering it talks about, “4 Ways to know its [sic] time to fight,” all of which amount to an unjustified belief that God is on one’s side. Sections such as “Organizational Structure for War” leave no doubt that this is meant to be a guide to literal, not figurative, war.
I wonder if they consider Muslims to be Tyrants. I mean, they rule with God...
@smeagolheart Calling for war, to put a pacifist law into effect? That would be hilarious if it weren't disturbing.
I am reminded of a comment from a hentai webcomic I read regularly.
In the webcomic, a character said "I fight for peace!"
The comment was a meme pic with the text "Fighting for peace is like f-ing for virginity" (I censored the f-word).
Also, that was an amusing, if also disturbing read.
On the list of "Things for a Holy Army" are included circumcision, trumpets (and an ark. Why? Or THE Ark?), and money (and atonement. For needing the money?).
Being scared disqualifies you from military service, because it shows your faith is weak. You probably get stabbed in the back for not being faithful enough later.
Oh hey, an Old Testament reference on why the righteous men go away (I pulled out my bible for it. The direct line is that they are taken away from the evil of the world).
Then there was the organization of the army and the rules of engagement. First, try avoiding bloodshed (good) and make an "offer" (more like demand, it's not a negotiation) of peace before a declaration of war, which has the "no abortions, no gays, no commies, and everyone has to "obey Biblical law" (direct quote mine)" as the terms for peace. Not negotiable. If they don't resist, they have to pay a share of work and taxes. If they do resist, kill all the males.
"A tyrant is someone who rules without God." I'm glad we defined that.
More Old Testament references.
Oh hey, assassination is not murder, it's justice.
What a house of horrors. This was written, in all seriousness, by a serious "Christian"?
And "obey Biblical law"? How is this NOT, NOT just Sharia Law under the banner of another religion?
Ok, I read this. It sounds more like a treatise than a manifesto to me; no specifics, no call for action, nothing but a list of Old Testament war tactics in outline form. Ooohhh, scary. Again, much ado about nothing.
Seriously? I wasn't aware that Communists were in the bible.
It is not a treatise on Old Testament war tactics.
Pretty much. There's nothing from the New Testament there at all. I think he'd have a pretty rude awakening if he tried to do a 'Gideon' on China (or even Luxembourg for that matter). Again, sorry, not Christian and not frightening to me.
@smeagolheart Calling for war, to put a pacifist law into effect? That would be hilarious if it weren't disturbing.
I am reminded of a comment from a hentai webcomic I read regularly.
In the webcomic, a character said "I fight for peace!"
The comment was a meme pic with the text "Fighting for peace is like f-ing for virginity" (I censored the f-word).
Also, that was an amusing, if also disturbing read.
On the list of "Things for a Holy Army" are included circumcision, trumpets (and an ark. Why? Or THE Ark?), and money (and atonement. For needing the money?).
Being scared disqualifies you from military service, because it shows your faith is weak. You probably get stabbed in the back for not being faithful enough later.
Oh hey, an Old Testament reference on why the righteous men go away (I pulled out my bible for it. The direct line is that they are taken away from the evil of the world).
Then there was the organization of the army and the rules of engagement. First, try avoiding bloodshed (good) and make an "offer" (more like demand, it's not a negotiation) of peace before a declaration of war, which has the "no abortions, no gays, no commies, and everyone has to "obey Biblical law" (direct quote mine)" as the terms for peace. Not negotiable. If they don't resist, they have to pay a share of work and taxes. If they do resist, kill all the males.
"A tyrant is someone who rules without God." I'm glad we defined that.
More Old Testament references.
Oh hey, assassination is not murder, it's justice.
What a house of horrors. This was written, in all seriousness, by a serious "Christian"?
And "obey Biblical law"? How is this NOT, NOT just Sharia Law under the banner of another religion?
Ok, I read this. It sounds more like a treatise than a manifesto to me; no specifics, no call for action, nothing but a list of Old Testament war tactics in outline form. Ooohhh, scary. Again, much ado about nothing.
Seriously? I wasn't aware that Communists were in the bible.
It is not a treatise on Old Testament war tactics.
Well, considering it talks about, “4 Ways to know its [sic] time to fight,” all of which amount to an unjustified belief that God is on one’s side. Sections such as “Organizational Structure for War” leave no doubt that this is meant to be a guide to literal, not figurative, war.
I wonder if they consider Muslims to be Tyrants. I mean, they rule with God...
It didn't state that any of those 4 ways were indicated now. Again, it's more like a sermon outline than any call to action. I've heard quite a few 'Fire & Brimstone' sermons when I was young. Pastors and evangelists would use those Old Testament passages to fire people up and make them believe they'd have all this power if they were only 'holier' or had more faith. It's a tactic to get at people's emotions. By Tuesday most people had forgotten about it though. My church had services Sunday morning, Sunday evening and Wednesdays. I think it was mostly for the vain effort of keeping people fired up all the time.
What if they got their ideas from books? Or movies? Or watching a documentary on the History Channel? What if it was music that inspired them? All of those have been inspirations for killers in the past. Should we start banning books? Censoring music? Are authors and musicians then to blame when they inspire violence?
No. I'm not up with banning or censoring anything. I'm strictly speaking of "Hate Speech", nothing else.
What if the hate speech is in the song, book or movie? How is that any different?
There's no way of knowing if a work of fiction "inspires" an act of violence. If somebody stages an assassination based on a James Bond movie or something, I don't think the filmmaker is responsible because there was no suggestion that the killing was a good idea--it merely depicted it.
A call to violence or advocacy of violence, however, is very different. And this document by Matt Shea is literally advocating mass murder:
That's what it says. This isn't a colorful interpretation; these are the actual words of Matt Shea, who is calling for mass murder unless a highly specific theocracy is implemented.
"If they do not yield - kill all males."
I don't think we should just shake it off and say "well, it's unlikely to happen because not many people support this." This is not normal, and this is not acceptable.
One of our own Congressional representatives supports mass violence, rebellion against our democratic government, and the establishment of a theocracy through force of arms. And no, that's not okay.
What if they got their ideas from books? Or movies? Or watching a documentary on the History Channel? What if it was music that inspired them? All of those have been inspirations for killers in the past. Should we start banning books? Censoring music? Are authors and musicians then to blame when they inspire violence?
No. I'm not up with banning or censoring anything. I'm strictly speaking of "Hate Speech", nothing else.
What if the hate speech is in the song, book or movie? How is that any different?
You can say whatever you like. I just think there should be a penalty for espousing hate. Hey, I've read "Mein Kampf", the Little Red Book of Mao and the Communist Manifesto. You're talking something far more punitive than I am. How does imposing a monetary penalty if your words end up causing death or harm equate now to banning and/or censoring?
There's no way of knowing if a work of fiction "inspires" an act of violence. If somebody stages an assassination based on a James Bond movie or something, I don't think the filmmaker is responsible because there was no suggestion that the killing was a good idea--it merely depicted it.
A call to violence or advocacy of violence, however, is very different. And this document by Matt Shea is literally advocating mass murder:
That's what it says. This isn't a colorful interpretation; these are the actual words of Matt Shea, who is calling for mass murder unless a highly specific theocracy is implemented.
"If they do not yield - kill all males."
I don't think we should just shake it off and say "well, it's unlikely to happen because not many people support this." This is not normal, and this is not acceptable.
One of our own Congressional representatives supports mass violence, rebellion against our democratic government, and the establishment of a theocracy through force of arms. And no, that's not okay.
Well, he's a STATE Congressman (of Washington state), not a U.S. Congressman.
And this is NOT an isolated incident. He advocated on Infowars 4 years ago that local police and government should not support the federal government. There have been more speeches in between now and then as well.
There's no way of knowing if a work of fiction "inspires" an act of violence. If somebody stages an assassination based on a James Bond movie or something, I don't think the filmmaker is responsible because there was no suggestion that the killing was a good idea--it merely depicted it.
A call to violence or advocacy of violence, however, is very different. And this document by Matt Shea is literally advocating mass murder:
That's what it says. This isn't a colorful interpretation; these are the actual words of Matt Shea, who is calling for mass murder unless a highly specific theocracy is implemented.
"If they do not yield - kill all males."
I don't think we should just shake it off and say "well, it's unlikely to happen because not many people support this." This is not normal, and this is not acceptable.
One of our own Congressional representatives supports mass violence, rebellion against our democratic government, and the establishment of a theocracy through force of arms. And no, that's not okay.
We'd better start tape recording every sermon and have the Thought Police start rounding people up then. We'll probably need a lot more prisons though. Well that'll be a lot of good construction jobs created anyway...
This guy is allowed to believe a literal interpretation of the Bible if he wants to. It's called freedom of religion. All of that stuff, barring the direct reference to communism, is in the Old Testament, right down to the troops following the Ark into battle. If morons want to vote for him that's their prerogative.
What if they got their ideas from books? Or movies? Or watching a documentary on the History Channel? What if it was music that inspired them? All of those have been inspirations for killers in the past. Should we start banning books? Censoring music? Are authors and musicians then to blame when they inspire violence?
No. I'm not up with banning or censoring anything. I'm strictly speaking of "Hate Speech", nothing else.
What if the hate speech is in the song, book or movie? How is that any different?
You can say whatever you like. I just think there should be a penalty for espousing hate. Hey, I've read "Mein Kampf", the Little Red Book of Mao and the Communist Manifesto. You're talking something far more punitive than I am. How does imposing a monetary penalty if your words end up causing death or harm equate now to banning and/or censoring?
What about verbally abusive parents, spouses, boyfriends/girlfriends, relatives, etc... Far more people have been damaged, wounded and yes even killed (via suicide) from that than from 'hate speech'. Hate speech sells newspapers though...
What if they got their ideas from books? Or movies? Or watching a documentary on the History Channel? What if it was music that inspired them? All of those have been inspirations for killers in the past. Should we start banning books? Censoring music? Are authors and musicians then to blame when they inspire violence?
No. I'm not up with banning or censoring anything. I'm strictly speaking of "Hate Speech", nothing else.
What if the hate speech is in the song, book or movie? How is that any different?
You can say whatever you like. I just think there should be a penalty for espousing hate. Hey, I've read "Mein Kampf", the Little Red Book of Mao and the Communist Manifesto. You're talking something far more punitive than I am. How does imposing a monetary penalty if your words end up causing death or harm equate now to banning and/or censoring?
What about verbally abusive parents, spouses, boyfriends/girlfriends, relatives, etc... Far more people have been damaged, wounded and yes even killed (via suicide) from that than from 'hate speech'. Hate speech sells newspapers though...
Then you can devise some kind of penalty you want to enact on them, and if I feel it's good and appropriate, maybe I'll end up supporting it. Go right ahead. I'm not obligated to solve all of the world's problems around speech that causes problems.
There's no way of knowing if a work of fiction "inspires" an act of violence. If somebody stages an assassination based on a James Bond movie or something, I don't think the filmmaker is responsible because there was no suggestion that the killing was a good idea--it merely depicted it.
A call to violence or advocacy of violence, however, is very different. And this document by Matt Shea is literally advocating mass murder:
That's what it says. This isn't a colorful interpretation; these are the actual words of Matt Shea, who is calling for mass murder unless a highly specific theocracy is implemented.
"If they do not yield - kill all males."
I don't think we should just shake it off and say "well, it's unlikely to happen because not many people support this." This is not normal, and this is not acceptable.
One of our own Congressional representatives supports mass violence, rebellion against our democratic government, and the establishment of a theocracy through force of arms. And no, that's not okay.
We'd better start tape recording every sermon and have the Thought Police start rounding people up then. We'll probably need a lot more prisons though. Well that'll be a lot of good construction jobs created anyway...
This guy is allowed to believe a literal interpretation of the Bible if he wants to. It's called freedom of religion. All of that stuff, barring the direct reference to communism, is in the Old Testament, right down to the troops following the Ark into battle. If morons want to vote for him that's their prerogative.
Also mentioned that is not biblical:
1. Scorched earth tactics and Sherman's March to the Sea. 2. Modern military ranks in the organizational structure. 3. Majority rule (and that god doesn't use majorities) 4. Dietrich Bonhoeffer and (a) plot to kill Hitler, which I have my doubts about his involvement reading up on it, he'd been arrested and imprisoned for more than a year before the plot he was said to be implicated in. 5. Guerilla warfare
"Don't give anything to the government" is proof it's not Old Testament.
There's no way of knowing if a work of fiction "inspires" an act of violence. If somebody stages an assassination based on a James Bond movie or something, I don't think the filmmaker is responsible because there was no suggestion that the killing was a good idea--it merely depicted it.
A call to violence or advocacy of violence, however, is very different. And this document by Matt Shea is literally advocating mass murder:
That's what it says. This isn't a colorful interpretation; these are the actual words of Matt Shea, who is calling for mass murder unless a highly specific theocracy is implemented.
"If they do not yield - kill all males."
I don't think we should just shake it off and say "well, it's unlikely to happen because not many people support this." This is not normal, and this is not acceptable.
One of our own Congressional representatives supports mass violence, rebellion against our democratic government, and the establishment of a theocracy through force of arms. And no, that's not okay.
Well, he's a STATE Congressman (of Washington state), not a U.S. Congressman.
And this is NOT an isolated incident. He advocated on Infowars 4 years ago that local police and government should not support the federal government. There have been more speeches in between now and then as well.
I don't think local police and government are required to 'support' the federal government. The Feds can take away money but they're not going to force them to do their bidding. That's why the Feds have their own police (FBI). Again, what's the big deal here? Are you saying that he's wrong and that local governments should be required to swear fealty to the Feds? Trump would love that!
Comments
That guy has been in reelected 5 terms. I hope the FBI just doesn't do nothing because publishing a manifesto calling for genocide is the first step to actually doing the deed.
The “Biblical Basis for War” begins with a list of “4 Ways to know its [sic] time to fight,” all of which amount to an unjustified belief that God is on one’s side. Sections such as “Organizational Structure for War” leave no doubt that this is meant to be a guide to literal, not figurative, war.
If this leads to violence, should this guy have no responsibility? No punishment, no payment of fines?
Continued from above: The document specifically contemplates overthrowing “tyranny,” but it quickly defines a “tyrant” as “someone who rules without God.” Thus, it appears to call for violence against any political leader who does not share Shea’s personal religious views. By Shea’s definition, the United States, a secular democracy founded on a godless constitution is tyrannical and meant to be overthrown. As a state legislator, Shea swore an oath to uphold that godless Constitution, whose only references to religion are exclusionary, including a prohibition against religious tests for public office in Article VI.
Most alarming of all, it lists four “options” for “biblically dealing with tyranny,” one of which is “Assassination & Sabotage.” It explains that “Assassination to remove tyrants is just, not murder,” citing a biblical verse that praises “treason,” by name, in overthrowing a non- theocratic government.
Rep. Shea, who reportedly wrote and distributed the manifesto for Christian sharia, defended it in a recent video. With a stunning lack of self-awareness, Shea condemned “Islamists,” apparently unaware that his written plan for a theocratic armed rebellion is identical to the goals of radicalized Islamists, only based on a different book.
Shea’s document promises that martyrs will be rewarded in the afterlife, citing the Old Testament. It also instructs holy warriors to “Make an offer of Peace before declaring war,” demanding total submission to biblical law. If this is refused, the instruction is to “kill all males.” It lists a “Law of Booty” that requires that plunder be given to the “Church & Ministry,” not to the government.
Adding another layer of hypocrisy, the document is openly anti-democratic, stating that “God doesn’t use majorities. The majority is usually wrong.”
What Happened To Danye Jones? Son Of Ferguson Activist Found Hanged From Tree
https://www.essence.com/news/what-happened-to-danye-jones-son-of-ferguson-activist-found-hanged-from-tree/'Consider it a rifle': Trump says migrants throwing rocks will be treated as armed
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/01/trump-immigration-953569?fbclid=IwAR2mz4uo69LyHy7CVYjo9yb_UHofsqrm9BXD1SwUB2o5k1KeDaW-KAbit3sReport: White Supremacists Lead Nation In Domestic Terrorism
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2018/01/report-white-supremacists-lead-nation-domestic-terrorism/?fbclid=IwAR0otIljSdNZ0CrrgwALt6EtoRTRGsCm_Y6IxREtj-T3NUemeBKgfLyoTtYNigerian Army Uses Trump’s Words to Justify Fatal Shooting of Rock-Throwing Protesters
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/02/world/africa/nigeria-trump-rocks.html?fbclid=IwAR1XRjxA0OSr7TdKdc4kTJGLTZntUrXZTzcLsC-RzCIPUEgBHSa6ZYSLZeE#click=https://t.co/J972PJ0ISNTalk about words mattering!
Donald Trump didn't tell the truth 83 times in 1 day
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/02/politics/donald-trump-lies/index.html?fbclid=IwAR0hvbdkoDTdMHA1JWrci43-0Jmzq2umf4gx_fY6vmPE_QLHYDjk-1PSUPUCritic's Notebook: Barbra Streisand's 'Walls' Drags Trump — and Reminds the World of Her Artistic Powers
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/barbra-streisand-s-walls-review-album-drags-trump-flaunts-artistry-1157287?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=THR's+Today+in+Entertainment_now_2018-11-02+07:23:39_wrobinson&utm_term=hollywoodreporter_tie&fbclid=IwAR2EOI21w-r2IDiNNHkSuCeLUxeFTOCRWd0x_bazy1FqbpZUhYoe_v0nBYMIf We Called Ourselves Yellow
https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2018/09/27/647989652/if-we-called-ourselves-yellow?fbclid=IwAR1pX3Yv5voXeP_aSrOvRUJ-auGdB6y19iZhvKW0j0PHRotFJTuKzRundhUFascism is Real, But the “Resistance” is Mostly Fake
https://blackagendareport.com/fascism-real-resistance-mostly-fake?fbclid=IwAR0h8oIlIy7c1iPPlhVs1SqXHI18QL1fFPSl56SG7lpHoYiu1V2OOErs8ToWhen Boys Can't Be Boys
https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2018/11/02/417513631/when-boys-cant-be-boys?fbclid=IwAR0YufoiLh1cEHtHCwQMwLTTUIH1DdqomEfDicfMDHb0XTQ3a3PzRvGM5JMThis Halloween: Be Careful How You 'Hang' Your Decorations
https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2018/10/27/416856004/this-halloween-be-careful-how-you-hang-your-decorations?fbclid=IwAR3jwXFHYDcks3gZCz7F22JQsgKPk9t0Jq4A7hcDVRojOkH5ofFjVPB0XssGay sauna ejects trans man because a customer complained a ‘woman’ was using the facility
https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2018/11/gay-sauna-ejects-trans-man-customer-complained-woman-using-facility/?fbclid=IwAR3N_VOrvE7_g4yhwAFolg1WtvLdIOXfsKIpYkwK5I0q0a_HFn6pHXGy6zYHRC Award-Winner Jeff Bezos Donates Over $10,000 to Anti-LGBTQ Politician
https://www.intomore.com/impact/hrc-award-winner-jeff-bezos-donates-over-10000-to-anti-lgbtq-politician?fbclid=IwAR1MngMpMprJXQ1XYsedt8LI0HMOrQlOlKFtDJT0wcvOUiBi4f5BiMqYBF4This Boy In A Homemade MTA Bus Had The Most Heartwarming Halloween Costume In NYC
http://gothamist.com/2018/11/01/halloween_city_bus_costume.php?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=webfeeds&fbclid=IwAR3gQC9KQL6e8gSHYynt9F7NK-ATKPI-qur_wotSNMOhMu08EGLqU8UMi38Trump vs Obama on Speech Protesters
Though I'm curious where you think I stated that no one should ever be held accountable for their words. All I've been asking if what your anti hate speech law would look like. How would it apply, how would you enforce it, what would be the penalties? Obviously you aren't required to answer anything to anybody here, but why posit a new law that could come in conflict with one of our basic rights, only to refuse to elaborate on what that would look like?
*edit*
I went and tried to find a similar study of clinic and physician visits, and I've had bad luck finding anything. I did find a bunch of lists from various places of the top ten reasons people visit physicians. They don't have the same data behind them (that I can tell, I haven't found the sourcing), but I've seen the same results from about 6 different articles, and they also seem to have similar distribution to the larger study on hospital visits, so they are probably somewhat accurate.
"1 Respiratory: leading respiratory concerns include asthma, bronchitis, sinusitis and other acute infections
2 Circulatory: hypertension or high blood pressure is the leading diagnosis
3 Endocrine: diabetes, metabolic diseases and immunity disorders
4 Musculoskeletal: joint disorders, osteoarthritis and rheumatism
5 Nervous system and sense organs: ear infections, migraines and pink eye
6 Genitourinary: urinary tract (or bladder) infections, menstruation disorders and menopausal issues
7 Mental disorders: attention deficit disorder, depression and anxiety
8 Injury/poison: contusion or bruises, sprains, strains and open wounds
9 Skin and subcutaneous tissue: eczema, cellulitis (bacterial infection of the skin and tissues beneath the skin) and abscesses (collection of pus build-up within the tissue)
10 Infections and parasitic diseases: viral and chlamydial infections and strep sore throat"
In the webcomic, a character said "I fight for peace!"
The comment was a meme pic with the text "Fighting for peace is like f-ing for virginity" (I censored the f-word).
Also, that was an amusing, if also disturbing read.
On the list of "Things for a Holy Army" are included circumcision, trumpets (and an ark. Why? Or THE Ark?), and money (and atonement. For needing the money?).
Being scared disqualifies you from military service, because it shows your faith is weak. You probably get stabbed in the back for not being faithful enough later.
Oh hey, an Old Testament reference on why the righteous men go away (I pulled out my bible for it. The direct line is that they are taken away from the evil of the world).
Then there was the organization of the army and the rules of engagement. First, try avoiding bloodshed (good) and make an "offer" (more like demand, it's not a negotiation) of peace before a declaration of war, which has the "no abortions, no gays, no commies, and everyone has to "obey Biblical law" (direct quote mine)" as the terms for peace. Not negotiable. If they don't resist, they have to pay a share of work and taxes. If they do resist, kill all the males.
"A tyrant is someone who rules without God." I'm glad we defined that.
More Old Testament references.
Oh hey, assassination is not murder, it's justice.
What a house of horrors. This was written, in all seriousness, by a serious "Christian"?
And "obey Biblical law"? How is this NOT, NOT just Sharia Law under the banner of another religion?
I've said the above more than once, except about the details on the "other kind of restitution" part, and adding the part about getting to know the people you are hating on. Satisfied now?
There are four men who attempted to bomb a Mosque and apartment building in Kansas in 2016. One of the men's lawyers is essentially arguing for a reduced sentence because the man listened to Trump's hateful speeches. Would it be stupid to argue that Trump was *not* part of the reason for why he and the other men planned such a thing?
Pointing to Trump’s rhetoric, attorneys for Kansas militiaman convicted of mosque bomb plot ask for a more lenient sentence
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/10/30/pointing-trumps-rhetoric-attorneys-kansas-militiaman-convicted-mosque-bomb-plot-ask-more-lenient-sentence/?utm_term=.a4473b3fa439Here's a guy saying, "Trump's rhetoric informed my decision ro plant a bomb in a mosque."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/10/30/pointing-trumps-rhetoric-attorneys-kansas-militiaman-convicted-mosque-bomb-plot-ask-more-lenient-sentence/?utm_term=.a4473b3fa439
From the article:During the trial in the spring, prosecutors played back recordings in which Stein described Muslim immigrants as “cockroaches” that needed to be exterminated, and talked about killing Muslims with weapons dipped in pigs' blood. Two months before the conversation took place, The Washington Post’s Abigail Hauslohner noted, Trump had referenced a questionable tale about Gen. John J. Pershing killing Muslims with bullets dipped in pigs' blood.
Nor is Trump the only one implicated:
In the sentencing memo, Stein’s attorneys wrote that their client feared Muslims “because of what he learned about them on the internet and the videos he watched on YouTube.” His knowledge of the Koran, they say, “came directly from the internet and conservative talk-show hosts such as Sean Hannity and Michael Savage.”
And...
Meanwhile, Trump’s words have found their way into otherwise unrelated court cases. Last week, a man accused of groping another passenger on a Southwest Airlines flight reportedly told authorities that “the President of the United States says it’s okay to grab women by their private parts.”
What if they got their ideas from books? Or movies? Or watching a documentary on the History Channel? What if it was music that inspired them? All of those have been inspirations for killers in the past. Should we start banning books? Censoring music? Are authors and musicians then to blame when they inspire violence?
It is not a treatise on Old Testament war tactics.
I wonder if they consider Muslims to be Tyrants. I mean, they rule with God...
A call to violence or advocacy of violence, however, is very different. And this document by Matt Shea is literally advocating mass murder:
That's what it says. This isn't a colorful interpretation; these are the actual words of Matt Shea, who is calling for mass murder unless a highly specific theocracy is implemented.
"If they do not yield - kill all males."
I don't think we should just shake it off and say "well, it's unlikely to happen because not many people support this." This is not normal, and this is not acceptable.
One of our own Congressional representatives supports mass violence, rebellion against our democratic government, and the establishment of a theocracy through force of arms. And no, that's not okay.
And this is NOT an isolated incident. He advocated on Infowars 4 years ago that local police and government should not support the federal government. There have been more speeches in between now and then as well.
This guy is allowed to believe a literal interpretation of the Bible if he wants to. It's called freedom of religion. All of that stuff, barring the direct reference to communism, is in the Old Testament, right down to the troops following the Ark into battle. If morons want to vote for him that's their prerogative.
1. Scorched earth tactics and Sherman's March to the Sea.
2. Modern military ranks in the organizational structure.
3. Majority rule (and that god doesn't use majorities)
4. Dietrich Bonhoeffer and (a) plot to kill Hitler, which I have my doubts about his involvement reading up on it, he'd been arrested and imprisoned for more than a year before the plot he was said to be implicated in.
5. Guerilla warfare
"Don't give anything to the government" is proof it's not Old Testament.