3 ms·
It's a law against offensive speech. If more people in the UK are offended by trolling gays than by trolling Catholics, you don't need a conspiracy theory to e
by ineptech 4y ago
It's a law against offensive speech. If more people in the UK are offended by trolling gays than by trolling Catholics, you don't need a conspiracy theory to explain why one gets you in more trouble than the other.
To clarify, I don't agree with the law - I think offensive speech should be legal - but this Ayn Rand stuff just sounds petulant in this context. If you want to insult gays on social media as a hobby, the main thing stopping you is not government oppression, it's the fact that a majority of voters want you to not do that.
- throwaway8582 4y ago> the main thing stopping you is not government oppression, it's the fact that a majority of voters want you to not do that Do you really think that a majority of voters would want somebody to be arrested for a post like this? If we're going to automatically assume that all government actions are simply what the "majority of voters" wanted, then nothing the government does can ever be wrong.
- ineptech 4y agoDon't expand what I said to make it easier to argue against. I don't think all laws automatically reflect the will of this people. I think this one, the highly publicized one, the controversial one that basically everyone is aware of and has an opinion on, either does reflect the will of the people or will get changed if it doesn't. And the reason I think that is, making fun of gays used to be both widely accepted and totally legal, and those two things changed at roughly the same time. If that's not the law changing to reflect the evolving will of the electorate, it's a hell of a coincidence.