Techmage Racist Thread

by **sponge** » Nov 26, 2002 @ 9:57pm

So only if the message is considered nonviolent (which has many different definitions to different people) that they can then have a voice. That'll work. Then you'll have people arguing over what's a violent message.

by **damian** » Nov 26, 2002 @ 10:55pm

But then you could argue that talking about invading Iraq is giving a violent message.

I think that the line shoud be (and is) drawn in that unless someone says something that's a direct threat of violence to others, then it shouldn't be allowed.

Thus, it's OK to say "all whites are stupid as hell and ignorant" while it's not OK to say "kill all whites!"

Website · by **Digital Chaos** » Nov 26, 2002 @ 11:29pm

by **James S** » Nov 26, 2002 @ 11:46pm

by **sponge** » Nov 27, 2002 @ 2:41am

by **Cameron** » Nov 27, 2002 @ 3:09am

by **randall** » Nov 27, 2002 @ 3:50am

by **sandmann** » Nov 27, 2002 @ 5:14am

The short story is called Harrison Bergeron, and I love it.

Okay so about the lines thing, you can never win. You either have no line, or, well, have no line. You either allow nothing or allow everything; anything in the grey is hypocritical. Everyone should have their say, just don't listen if you don't agree. It's easy to say but hard to act.

I was at a KKK rally (as a spectator) this week, and essentially it was 20 white guys in their hoods with 500 angry people saying "FUCK YOU BIGOT" and "EAT A DICK RACIST". On one side there were blacks, and the other were punks. At one point one of the blacks got in a fight with one of the punks and a brawl almost broke out. It was ridiculous, so much hate on all sides. It was a hate rally and the KKK weren't the only ones participating.

by **James S** » Nov 27, 2002 @ 5:27am

Website · by **Digital Chaos** » Nov 27, 2002 @ 7:44pm

Techmage Racist Thread

Sort

Forum Description

Moderators:

Forum permissions