Leon, you misrepresented your argument from the outset. The guy was already in prison and he was caught at the Hungarian border.

No credibility AT ALL.

I am absolutely a social justice warrior. I just believe in different social justice causes than you.

Jeff Kuta, I thought I posted a link, but apparently I forgot. This is the article I was reading. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/world/europe/horst-mahler-germany-hungary.html

Jeff Kuta, I do see the difference. That's why I'm saying one should be punished and the other shouldn't. It is you who are blinding yourself.

It's ok to be SJW for free speech. But when one defends the right of others to deny the Holocaust, it would be wise for them to condemn the message even as they defend the messenger. Otherwise, they risk being judged by the company they keep.

I thought some things were assumed among rational educated people. I don't think anyone here would suddenly start seriously claiming that he's an alien from outer space... or that the Holocaust didn't happen.

Whether or not one is a neo-Nazi should make no bearing on his arguments in favor of free speech. I am not, as I said, a neo-Nazi, but a neo-Nazi should be able to make the same arguments I have, and they are just as legitimate.

It is a great equivalency. ISIS rips down statues of people who offend them. Democrats tear down statues of people who offend them.

It was Democrats who put those statues up in the first place. If President Grant was supported in Reconstruction the scourge of those Southern Democrats and confederate sympathizers would have been delt with once and for all.

Captain, you got lost at sea :)

Here is leons order of importance

1. Free speech > 2. A persons right to be free of hate speech > 3. A persons individual liberty

Go ahead and rearrange.

But it sounds like youd fight for the rights of someone to spew racist slurs-be a nazi-a slaver-savage barbarian before youd fight for the rights of the liberty OF THE VICTIM.

So zmaj, you support the statues, the traitorous southern democrats and the slave-holding confederacy?

Lol no. Wrong thread, captain.

If a guy stands on a street corner calling people to join a militia to scare minorities youd fight for his right to rally potential violent racists to his cause because thats your idea of liberty.

@brainbomb, wouldn't that be better than him doing it undercover?

Zmaj and leon1122:

Tell me why these provisions in German law regarding Volksverhetzung (incitement of the masses) are unreasonable:

"For any hate speech to be punishable as Volksverhetzung, the law requires that said speech be "qualified for disturbing public peace" either by inciting "hatred against parts of the populace" or calling for "acts of violence or despotism against them", or by attacking "the human dignity of others by reviling, maliciously making contemptible or slandering parts of the populace"."

If you can't come up with a counterargument, everything you have said above is moot because of your lame straw man attempts.

If a Republican won the nomination for President on a 'bring back slavery' campaign promise but his opponent was obama who would you vote for.

@Jeff

"If you can't come up with a counterargument, everything you have said above is moot because of your lame straw man attempts."

You win.

Feel free to double down on "freedom of speech" because that's all you seem intellectually capable of holding onto in your head.

Weak sauce, Zmaj. Weak sauce.

@brainbomb, why do you keep assuming people are insane? Your examples can't be argued against because they're unreal.

Bb assumes they are insane as he is insane

I didnt call his sanity into question. Sanity is boring. I do however want to know if he would vote for a candidate that was pro slavery - given his opinion of BLM, his low opinion of democrats and his obsession with defending neo nazis and slavers -- I honestly dont know what his answer is.

He says liberty and free speech are important to him.

So what if a presedential candidate came along whose solution to illegal.immigration is to reinstitute slavery for example.

It was prosecessionist southern democrat traitors who voted and supported that.

Fortunately they are all dead. May they not rest in peace.

And it was anti-Confederate southern Democrats who voted to tear the statues down.

You keep referring to Southern Democrats in such a way as if youd think id sympathize with them merely because you use the word democrat.

A slaver is a slaver.

The democrat party of the 1860's was a pretty substantial bunch of morons. I dont identify with them nor do I identify with slavers. I barely identify with tax and spend liberals. Im an environmentalist and a firm believer in our schools- education and finally yes - affordable healthcare thats way better than obamacare.

If you think the progressive movement by republicans and 1860's is still evident in todays republican party you really dont know much about politics.

To put it simply what is the Republican stance on affirmative action, raising affordable living wages, pathways to citizenship and states individual liberties to govern themselves (ie pot legalization )

@Brainbomb: The Democratic Party of 1860 is the same party as the Democratic Party of 2016. Their strategy and schemes have changed, but the old money and family legacies are still present.

If you want a party that represents your values that doesn't have a sorted history with slavery I recommend you either start a new political party or join the Green Party.

A thought experiment for the free speech SJWs:

Suppose you were on a collegiate campus in California, the best public university in the world. Suppose further that you were there to see the darling of free speech SJWs everywhere, Milo. And there are protesters and demonstrators, for and against.

Then, out of nowhere, a shining knight in gleaming, white hair-mor rides through the crowd on a sturdy destrier. One of the anti-fas shouts "Get him!" In the ensuing melee, Milo is hurt, as are you.

Who gets arrested, the guy who incited the act shouting "Get him!" or the people physically assaulting you and your demigod?

"@Brainbomb: The Democratic Party of 1860 is the same party as the Democratic Party of 2016. Their strategy and schemes have changed, but the old money and family legacies are still present."

Well since the electoral map is much larger and theres like a shitload more people now....

This is a completely asinine thing to say anyway. Can you provide even one actual example of a policy from the 1860's thats similair?