3 ms·
By this logic you're saying that advocating and inciting genocide is just an "unpopular opinion" that deserves to be protected. You know, because it's not again
by nrmitchi 6y ago
By this logic you're saying that advocating and inciting genocide is just an "unpopular opinion" that deserves to be protected. You know, because it's not against a specific, named person.
I'm not even going converse this with nonsense.
- trident5000 6y agoActually that would be a direct threat of harm which I specifically mentioned several times. So no, I'm actually not saying that. I'm not sure how its even possible you arrived at that conclusion.
- afuchs 6y agoHow is it determined if something is a call to genocide or otherwise a call to commit harm? From what I can tell, whether speech in the form of "group X should be eliminated" constitutes a threat is still subject to controversy [1]. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2007/02/steyn-and-genocide/230754/ https://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2007/02/steyn...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]