What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

What the Fark 2: That Was... Interesting.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: What the Fark 2: That Was... Interesting.

FlagDUDE08 said:
In response to the RFRA, a group in Indiana creates The First Church of Cannabis. http://thefreethoughtproject.com/in...oses-due-controversial-religious-freedom-act/
Click to expand...

Nice.

This should be inscribed on every state legislature and courthouse:

There’s never a need to use the coercive and aggressive power of the state, and by default its monopoly on force, against another individual for simply having a viewpoint that you don’t agree with or perhaps find offensive.
Click to expand...
 
Re: What the Fark 2: That Was... Interesting.

St. Clown said:
With that in mind, where do you stand on Hate Speech legislation?
Click to expand...

I'm typically against it. For example, IINM in Germany it is illegal to deny the Holocaust. I believe that law is wrong.

There are limits, and the legal test should be some sort of reasonable person standard. For example, flying a confederate flag across from a black guy's house has generalized symbolic value and is allowed. Burning a cross on the lawn across from a black guy's house is obviously making a direct threat against them. Intimidation is illegal in certain contexts.

But the way I've always thought of it is you shouldn't have a separate law for, say, "racial intimidation." You should have a general law against intimidation, and in prosecuting using that law racial context and history should weigh in the decision.
 
Re: What the Fark 2: That Was... Interesting.

Kepler said:
Now you've gone and ruined it. Reading that was so sad. People who are faced with terrible realities often retreat into a fantasy world. It explains everything from quackery to religion. And given say a low chance survival or as in this case a radical and disfiguring treatment, adopting a fictional fad diet or beneficent man in the sky to make the final days more bearable is entirely understandable.

My despair in the stupidity of people is far less than my sympathy for this poor deluded woman and her loved ones. RIP.
Click to expand...
Her boyfriend just revealed that she turned to radiation days before she died.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top