RE: Did Charlottesvilel mean anything?
September 5, 2017 at 10:12 am
(This post was last modified: September 5, 2017 at 10:22 am by Thumpalumpacus.)
(September 5, 2017 at 7:31 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: Again, freedom is not a suicide pact.
It's a good thing I didn't say it is, then.
When we allot to government the power to decide what is and is not acceptable political speech, we may be sure that that power will be abused.
(September 5, 2017 at 5:59 am)Tizheruk Wrote:Quote:He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you.
I have better one . Beware he who tolerates monsters and allows them to grows and prosper in your mist under the misguided notion of confusing them with ducks or sheep. And declaring because we treat the ducks and sheep one way we must do the same to the monsters . And as the monsters plot and scheme and make there contempt for all we stand for right in front of us . Some say we don't want to be monsters and lie down on the ground and wait to be devoured because it's not something a monster do. Others say i'm not a monster but I refuse to lie down and wait for the monster to eat me and cuts the monster down .
Just because one can stare into the abyss and it can gaze back does not make you and the abyss one and the same.
... says the guy who would deny freedom to others because their views don't accord with his own.
Don't think for a moment I'm confused about who these people are and what they represent, or that I don't stand against them; I do. But unlike you, I'm unwilling to remove rights from them simply because they make me uncomfortable.
When they commit crimes, I'm all for going after them with the power of the government. Until then, it is better using the power of better ideas. Simply silencing them using governmental force does one thing: it feeds their narrative of persecution. It would actually legitimize their complaints.
