•
•

Rule input from our subscribers (self.uncensorednews)

RamblinRambo3 が 投稿 - stickied post

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]RamblinRambo3[S] 3ポイント4ポイント  (9子コメント)

that tolerating hate speech dilutes intelligent debate.

No one has yet to define hate speech. It's just a loose concept that is always used to censor opinions. Do you consider it hate speech when someone points out that the majority of the US prison population is black? Do you consider it hate speech when someone states that the average IQ among blacks is well below that of whites? Both are facts yet censored almost everywhere on reddit.

In journalism

If there is one profession that should be very quiet when it comes to what should and shouldn't be allowed it's journalists. They've ruined their own reputation by pushing an agenda rather than conveying the news.

[–]TheChance 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

Do you consider it hate speech when someone points out that the majority of the US prison population is black? Do you consider it hate speech when someone states that the average IQ among blacks is well below that of whites?

No. I consider it hate speech when those facts are leveraged to make more damning sociological implications. We could talk for hours about why both of those things are true.

And if you're a genuinely interested, open-minded adult who is disinclined to write off a whole segment of humanity because of their skin tone, then I don't see anything hateful in having that conversation. This country is broken in many ways.

My point is, you don't have to tolerate the Stormfrontesque side of it, the people who don't care that correlation isn't causation.

In short, there is a chunk of the populace who can't get their head around the fact that we aren't all bigots. They assume that everybody feels "that way" about anyone who's different, but most people are being suppressed or repressed by PC culture. Those are the people you censor. They only drag the conversation down.

[–]RamblinRambo3[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well what I can promise you is that we will not remove any comments just because they're bigoted etc.

[–]Floorspud 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's like if there is a debate on CNN about climate change or evolution and they give equal time to 2 people of opposing views. The fact is their viewpoints are not equal. Like imagine if they had somebody on talking about the horrors of pedophilia in the Catholic Church and then they say "well to be fair lets listen to this guy who is in favor of raping children".

[–]throwmeawayinalake 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

so, you hate acting on facts? just use the power of voting, most people have the default setting so votes under a certain amount disappear.

[–]D1G17AL 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

The only thing I would really say on this. Most of the time I have understood hate speech to be equitable to speech that isn't covered under the first amendment. The type of things that would lead to the incitement of violence and other non-1st amendment types of speech.

Just my two cents.

[–]TotesMessenger 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)

[–]Floorspud -2ポイント-1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Do you consider it hate speech when someone points out that the majority of the US prison population is black? Do you consider it hate speech when someone states that the average IQ among blacks is well below that of whites?

Debatable as to the reasons why this is the case. Saying it's due to their race could be hate speech, at least very narrow minded and not taking into account the way they are treated by society historically.

[–]throwmeawayinalake -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

well congratulations, now if someone says that, you can say what you just did... and the community gets to vote.

[–]Floorspud 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Not all points of view are equal.