4 months in prison for wearing a hateful t-shirt....yay for free speech Britain!

[Ghost]

Basically the point of that story is that through our social connections we typically know where the lines are. Personally, I think there should be no lines, but I wear nothing but jackets and button shirts which look very dull. My students Dad thinks there should be lines and told his son as much. The son despite his bravery was forced to compromise due to the expectations and demands of others. You don't really need laws telling you what to do as we all exist quite fine without them.

So, if some one was to destory your hard drive (Because they can) and kept doing it each time you replaced it. You would have no problem with this because the person doing it, "See's no lines".

Just asking.

[Gandalf]

Basically the point of that story is that through our social connections we typically know where the lines are. Personally, I think there should be no lines, but I wear nothing but jackets and button shirts which look very dull. My students Dad thinks there should be lines and told his son as much. The son despite his bravery was forced to compromise due to the expectations and demands of others. You don't really need laws telling you what to do as we all exist quite fine without them.

So, if some one was to destory your hard drive (Because they can) and kept doing it each time you replaced it. You would have no problem with this because the person doing it, "See's no lines".

Just asking.

That would be a physical act of aggression resulting in the damage to property. I don't believe any person has the right to destroy the property of another person (not even a rice cooker), not unless they were reacting to something that had been physically done to them. If you break my pencil you can be sure I will snap yours into one piece more. That is just. I don't believe in physical violence or property destruction without sufficient reason though.

I guess it shows how primitive people are if they cannot engage rhetorically without the need to physically hurt someone or destroy their property.

[Ghost]

Basically the point of that story is that through our social connections we typically know where the lines are. Personally, I think there should be no lines, but I wear nothing but jackets and button shirts which look very dull. My students Dad thinks there should be lines and told his son as much. The son despite his bravery was forced to compromise due to the expectations and demands of others. You don't really need laws telling you what to do as we all exist quite fine without them.

So, if some one was to destory your hard drive (Because they can) and kept doing it each time you replaced it. You would have no problem with this because the person doing it, "See's no lines".

Just asking.

That would be a physical act of aggression resulting in the damage to property. I don't believe any person has the right to destroy the property of another person (not even a rice cooker), not unless they were reacting to something that had been physically done to them. If you break my pencil you can be sure I will snap yours into one piece more. That is just. I don't believe in physical violence or property destruction without sufficient reason though.

I guess it shows how primitive people are if they cannot engage rhetorically without the need to physically hurt someone or destroy their property.

So there is a line you won't cross unless provoked. Correct?

[Gandalf]

Basically the point of that story is that through our social connections we typically know where the lines are. Personally, I think there should be no lines, but I wear nothing but jackets and button shirts which look very dull. My students Dad thinks there should be lines and told his son as much. The son despite his bravery was forced to compromise due to the expectations and demands of others. You don't really need laws telling you what to do as we all exist quite fine without them.

So, if some one was to destory your hard drive (Because they can) and kept doing it each time you replaced it. You would have no problem with this because the person doing it, "See's no lines".

Just asking.

That would be a physical act of aggression resulting in the damage to property. I don't believe any person has the right to destroy the property of another person (not even a rice cooker), not unless they were reacting to something that had been physically done to them. If you break my pencil you can be sure I will snap yours into one piece more. That is just. I don't believe in physical violence or property destruction without sufficient reason though.

I guess it shows how primitive people are if they cannot engage rhetorically without the need to physically hurt someone or destroy their property.

So there is a line you won't cross unless provoked. Correct?

Of course, I think most people have their own natural inclination to just want to get on with life without too much fuss. Most of us prefer to avoid confrontation in our daily lives. Like I say, the guy wearing that t-shirt is a complete twit and it is something I would never do myself. All I am arguing though is that people should have the right to express themselves in inflammatory ways. Few people would ever bother with doing it though as friends and family keep you in check. I dislike the law being involved in such instances as I believe it is a law that can be used for all the wrong reasons. Wearing a t-shirt saying 'The Queen needs a guillotine' should never be a crime, but me smashing up someones favorite Jubilee mug definitely should be.

[Ghost]

Of course, I think most people have their own natural inclination to just want to get on with life without too much fuss. Most of us prefer to avoid confrontation in our daily lives. Like I say, the guy wearing that t-shirt is a complete twit and it is something I would never do myself. All I am arguing though is that people should have the right to express themselves in inflammatory ways. Few people would ever bother with doing it though as friends and family keep you in check. I dislike the law being involved in such instances as I believe it is a law that can be used for all the wrong reasons. Wearing a t-shirt saying 'The Queen needs a guillotine' should never be a crime, but me smashing up someones favorite Jubilee mug definitely should be.

But with most of the thread you start on here about America and religion in general, would you not say that you come on here just for that purpose. To cause confrontation with some of the members on here.

[Gandalf]

Of course, I think most people have their own natural inclination to just want to get on with life without too much fuss. Most of us prefer to avoid confrontation in our daily lives. Like I say, the guy wearing that t-shirt is a complete twit and it is something I would never do myself. All I am arguing though is that people should have the right to express themselves in inflammatory ways. Few people would ever bother with doing it though as friends and family keep you in check. I dislike the law being involved in such instances as I believe it is a law that can be used for all the wrong reasons. Wearing a t-shirt saying 'The Queen needs a guillotine' should never be a crime, but me smashing up someones favorite Jubilee mug definitely should be.

But with most of the thread you start on here about America and religion in general, would you not say that you come on here just for that purpose. To cause confrontation with some of the members on here.

No, not at all. I just try to present what I view as my own honest take on the world. If others disagree with me, then that is just part of the process. I have to say what I believe about whatever is concerning me at a given time. That is freedom of speech, anyone can disagree with me and that is all too often the case. The process of confrontation isn't something I enjoy though and I really don't want to upset anybody. The process is something that I have to go through though and I push myself through it. I do restrain my thread starting an awful lot too. I read a lot during the day and let most of it slide.

[Ghost]

Of course, I think most people have their own natural inclination to just want to get on with life without too much fuss. Most of us prefer to avoid confrontation in our daily lives. Like I say, the guy wearing that t-shirt is a complete twit and it is something I would never do myself. All I am arguing though is that people should have the right to express themselves in inflammatory ways. Few people would ever bother with doing it though as friends and family keep you in check. I dislike the law being involved in such instances as I believe it is a law that can be used for all the wrong reasons. Wearing a t-shirt saying 'The Queen needs a guillotine' should never be a crime, but me smashing up someones favorite Jubilee mug definitely should be.

But with most of the thread you start on here about America and religion in general, would you not say that you come on here just for that purpose. To cause confrontation with some of the members on here.

No, not at all. I just try to present what I view as my own honest take on the world. If others disagree with me, then that is just part of the process. I have to say what I believe about whatever is concerning me at a given time. That is freedom of speech, anyone can disagree with me and that is all too often the case. The process of confrontation isn't something I enjoy though and I really don't want to upset anybody. The process is something that I have to go through though and I push myself through it. I do restrain my thread starting an awful lot too. I read a lot during the day and let most of it slide.

Really do not see the difference here Miles, between you and the guy with the T'Shit, except maybe in the timing.