LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 126
0 members and 126 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 05:16 AM.
View Single Post
Old 06-25-2019, 01:20 PM   #2047
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 26,231
Re: Turd in the Bowl

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower View Post
You can try to impose your arbitrary rules (comedy is off-limits from attack, provided it meets your subjective definition of "doing it right"), but nobody cares what you think. If I decide that Maher is an asshole and I think that he should be kicked off HBO, I am going to say so. That is my free speech, and you are anti-free speech for suggesting that I need to engage in some proportionality analysis. I can say what I want. If you think I should not be allowed to demand that Maher be kicked off HBO, then you can say so. But stop your whining about it, or invoking your non-existent right to the entertainment of your choosing. And stop saying things like I am "beyond my free speech rights," which I assume is just shorthand for you saying that you don't like my speech, as no actual "free speech rights" have been implicated whatsoever. You're just crying to the refs about other people crying to the refs.
Okay. Well then when you cry for someone to be fired, someone who disagrees with you can doxx you, and subtly suggest how great it would be for people to throw eggs at your house. He can amass a group of people to spam the shit out of your facebook page, put up deep fakes of you making odious comments. He can create a boycott of your employer such that you get fired.

This is where this stuff goes. It's dumb. And your argument here is an example of reductive reasoning's limitations.

People call the serially offended crybabies for a good reason. It's meant to shame and degrade them because if complaining about minor things should become a form of truly exerting power to chill free speech, we might as well throw the concept of free speech out the window.

Elite sensibilities must be allowed to govern subtle rights like free speech. You can't hand that over to a mob of necessarily middling intelligence, or hyper-sensitive types (that's redundant, but those characteristics should be broken out). And as I noted earlier, ease at which one is offended is inverse to intelligence. If you think I'm wrong, consider how the smartest people you know handle offense and how the dumbest do so. "I'm offended" is a relic of Honor Culture. It's adopting the lexicon of Foghorn Leghorn -- "I say, I say... I am insulted, and I demand sat-is-faction."
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

Last edited by sebastian_dangerfield; 06-25-2019 at 01:24 PM..
sebastian_dangerfield is offline  
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:52 PM.