> There are no evil people, there are only people who have been brought up in an environment where the actions they have taken are acceptable. Funny, serial ki

> There are no evil people, there are only people who have been brought up in an environment where the actions they have taken are acceptable. Funny, serial killers still exist and will continue existing, even though society has condemned that for a long, long time. Yes, some people are born with their wires misshapen, just like there're people born deaf. What? Did you think that the brain was, somehow, our only organ that couldn't get messed up since birth? > What, you think people who do evil things are genetically predetermined to do them? [...] Hundreds of psychopaths have been born So, are they or are they not born? You're contradicting yourself. > Actually, the country I live in, like most European countries, has hate speech laws. We no longer have quite as bad a problem with racism as the US does. Yeah, you keep telling yourself that. A friend of mine (hailing from my latin american country) and the refugee crisis tell me otherwise. If so-called "hate speech" is banned openly, it just happens behind doors, using so-called "coded language". > The 915 surviving and growing white supremacy hate groups, along with the 'alt-right'. So do TERFs, the militant branch of BLM, AntiFa, etc. If we're going to judge by fringe groups, they just happen to be more visible every day on both sides. And they don't represent the majority, it's as if they were called "fringe" for a reason. > I'm pretty sure they said the same thing about the National Socialist Party... And it did die out. Some people might be itching to call anyone they disagree with "nazis", but they aren't. > We're not making happiness mandatory, we're making blatantly abusive speech against the law Funny how you earlier in this very same comment said that you weren't arguing for thought policing. Glad you decided to become honest at the end. > I mean, it should be covered under the various "harassment" legislation, but shrug apparently not. Harassment requires a victim. Yanow, someone being harassed. --- Anyways, you contradicted yourself twice, and one of those times was the very same thing you pretended you weren't arguing for. That's just dishonest argumentation, meaning this discussion is pointless, so I won't engage you further. Cheers.