A leopard can't change its spots.

[Autumnlicious]

Incitement to violence is a command onto another in proxy of oneself. We punish people for planning murder, ergo, by extension, we can also punish people for planning murder by proxy of someone else. Seems pretty clear to me.

However, I see no incitement to violence here. The only thing "harmed" is someone elses feelers.

True, free speech has limits like when it communicates actions, not ideas.

But this matter seems to be more over "Does the complainer have the right to be not offended over perceived insults to race?"

---

Do we know about this lady. Is she a known racist?

Does it matter? Why should her views be on trial?

As far as I know, she has not incited anyone to violence or shown a history of harassment against any set of individuals, except for this current event against a nebulous "race" of people. Hardly befitting on the same regard that we reserve for those disgusting Ku Klux Klan mobs.

All racists should be educated on human biology, if they do not conform, medically create them as those who they are racism against and see what happens : ) joking of course.

All atheists should be "educated" on Christianity. If they do not conform, they should be medically adjusted...

Religion and biology are 2 different beasts. You can ridicule religion because it is a choice, color of skin is not.

People can become atheists, you cannot undo the color of your skin.

So one possesses the "Right to be not offended" over things that one cannot change?