Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6181300" data-attributes="member: 87792">Who personally is your watermelon hating message hurting?&nbsp; How does it lead to harm.On the other hand it is right to say &quot;That guy burns books for bad reasons.&nbsp; I will not buy anything from him and I will not buy from anyone who advertises on his site.&quot;&nbsp; That too is free speech.I await the information that legions of hackers tried to erase Penny Arcade from the internet.This is not in dispute.This is not in dispute.&nbsp; The question is &quot;If someone is deliberately insulting are people allowed to say so?&nbsp; And are they allowed to treat that person differently because they are being deliberately insulting?&quot;This is not relevant.&nbsp; No one was trying to stop the deliberate insult because it had already happened.&nbsp; They were trying to make the insult lead to consequences.&nbsp; They were taking their right to be insulted and using it.&nbsp; Returning speech with more speech.&nbsp; Speech pointing out how the rape-monster T-shirts were vile.&nbsp; How they upset people.&nbsp; And how they would not have anything to do with people who thought that that sort of behaviour was acceptable.Why do you think &quot;I will not give money to people who associate themselves with rape monsters and by associating yourself with a rape monster you are going down in my estimation&quot; either isn't speech or is speech that should be banned?Freedom of speech means freedom of speech.&nbsp; That includes the right to reply.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 6181300, member: 87792"] Who personally is your watermelon hating message hurting? How does it lead to harm. On the other hand it is right to say "That guy burns books for bad reasons. I will not buy anything from him and I will not buy from anyone who advertises on his site." That too is free speech. I await the information that legions of hackers tried to erase Penny Arcade from the internet. This is not in dispute. This is not in dispute. The question is "If someone is deliberately insulting are people allowed to say so? And are they allowed to treat that person differently because they are being deliberately insulting?" This is not relevant. No one was trying to stop the deliberate insult because it had already happened. They were trying to make the insult lead to consequences. They were taking their right to be insulted and using it. Returning speech with more speech. Speech pointing out how the rape-monster T-shirts were vile. How they upset people. And how they would not have anything to do with people who thought that that sort of behaviour was acceptable. Why do you think "I will not give money to people who associate themselves with rape monsters and by associating yourself with a rape monster you are going down in my estimation" either isn't speech or is speech that should be banned? Freedom of speech means freedom of speech. That includes the right to reply. [/QUOTE]

Verification