3 ms·
Honestly, if you don't understand that the civil and legal concepts are "political concepts" delegated to the legislature, its not worth debating this any furth
by 001sky 13y ago
Honestly, if you don't understand that the civil and legal concepts are "political concepts" delegated to the legislature, its not worth debating this any further.
And yeah there are plenty of ways to be a bully without breaking the law. But using HN as a megaphone to be a bully on some murky bit of special interest politics is in poor form.
Lastly, the first amendment (like the second) applies to legal persons. And someone casting a ballot or taking a good-faith position on the other side of a legitimate political question or debate, is not an excuse for dis-proportionate behaviour.
- masklinn 13y ago> Honestly, if you don't understand that the civil and legal concepts are "political concepts" delegated to the legislature, its not worth debating this any further. Let's not then. > And yeah there are plenty of ways to be a bully without breaking the law. Your point? > to be a bully on some murky bit of special interest politics is in poor form. It's poor form to defend one's opinion that being intent on curtailing people's civil rights and equality before the law makes one a bad fit for CEO of an organisation priding itself on openness, inclusiveness and opportunity? But it's OK to give money towards the curtailing of a minority's civil rights, that's not bullying or in poor form? > is not an excuse for dis-proportionate behaviour. Ah so criticising people for attempting to curtail other people's civil rights is "disproportionate behaviour" now. I live and learn.