Leftist Marxist goons.

[taxme]

The ugly ones here are the white supremacists.

.

So, just who are the white supremacists here anyway? I haven't noticed any? So, who is?

Edited July 5, 2016 by taxme

[jacee]

So, just who are the white supremacists here anyway? I haven't noticed any? So, who is?

Some are blatant:

White people breeding with white people is all that is required

Others are more subtle.

.

[taxme]

I surmised many posts ago that this poster is to be ignored.

If one lacks any common sense and logic, well ya, maybe you should not bother with this poster. I prefer to have a debate with people who are not so emotional and talk foolishness. No wonder political correctness runs rampant here in Canada. Honest true debate and facts are always shut down instead of being discussed.

[taxme]

Some are blatant:

White people breeding with white people is all that is required

Others are more subtle.

.

Not so brilliant a comeback, fella. Go back and read what I said again, and this time try to get the drift of what I said correct. Stop putting words into my mouth. Because one is proud of his race does not mean that he is a white supremacist. Only politically correct trained seal people will come up with that foolish idea. But then again Canada is full of foolish and emotional non-thinking people. The sad part about that is that people who like to use common sense and logic are stuck with them. Pathetic indeed.

[Peter F]

Common sense and logic? When the Creator creates people capable of interbreeding, common sense and logic says thats what the Creator wants. But then I don't think you know snot about the Creator.

[jacee]

Jacee said:

Some [white supremacists]are blatant:

White people breeding with white people is all that is required

Stop putting words into my mouth.

Those are your words.

.

Edited July 5, 2016 by jacee

[Big Guy]

Being a white supremacist or white racist is not against the law. Freedom of speech protects all speech - be it interesting, controversial or distasteful. People have the right to express racist views and should be labelled as racists for those views.

Personally, I have little interest in racist views and have certainly no intention of getting involved in any discussion with someone holding those views.

[cybercoma]

Freedom of speech protects all speech

No it doesn't. Go back and read Section 1 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

[Guest]

Being a white supremacist or white racist is not against the law. Freedom of speech protects all speech - be it interesting, controversial or distasteful. People have the right to express racist views and should be labelled as racists for those views.

It should be that way. It should be up to the rest of us to castigate and ridicule those who choose to use their free speech to spread hate.

[taxme]

It should be that way. It should be up to the rest of us to castigate and ridicule those who choose to use their free speech to spread hate.

Why is being proud of being white is somehow spreading hate? So, if someone says that they are proud of being gay or proud of being Native Indian, would you say that they are promoting hate? Would you castigate and ridicule those who call themselves gay and Indian then? Over too you.

[taxme]

Those are your words.

.

The words that you are trying to put in my mouth and convey here is that I am suppose to be a white supremist or nazi because I say that I am proud of being Caucasian. Be proud of whoever you are, just don't say that you are proud of being white. To say so is being politically incorrect and spreading hatred. If that is the case then I am proud to say that I am politically incorrect, and I am not afraid to say so. I don't fear criticism for saying so, I live off of it.

[taxme]

Common sense and logic? When the Creator creates people capable of interbreeding, common sense and logic says thats what the Creator wants. But then I don't think you know snot about the Creator.

Common sense and logic should tell you that the creator doesn't want any mixing. That is why the creator created variety. The creator did not intend for a horse to mix it up with a cow. So, I suppose then that you think that you know snot about the creator then?

[Guest]

No it doesn't. Go back and read Section 1 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

That doesn't change freedom of speech. It just allows it to be taken away.

[jacee]

The words that you are trying to put in my mouth and convey here is that I am suppose to be a white supremist or nazi because I say that I am proud of being Caucasian. Be proud of whoever you are, just don't say that you are proud of being white. To say so is being politically incorrect and spreading hatred. If that is the case then I am proud to say that I am politically incorrect, and I am not afraid to say so. I don't fear criticism for saying so, I live off of it.

If it's just a matter of how YOU choose to live YOUR life, I'm inclined to live and let live.

If you're thinking everyone 'should/must' ascribe to your nonsense about not mixing races/maintaining white 'purity' ...

you can flock off.

That's the stuff that makes a racist into a Nazi.

.

Edited July 6, 2016 by jacee

[dialamah]

It should be that way. It should be up to the rest of us to castigate and ridicule those who choose to use their free speech to spread hate.

Such people don't believe they are deserving of castigation and ridicule. Instead they claim their detractors are trying to shut down discussion, are being politically correct or an SJW. With laws against hate speech I think the point that words have meanings and consequence is more easily made.

[Guest]

Such people don't believe they are deserving of castigation and ridicule. Instead they claim their detractors are trying to shut down discussion, are being politically correct or an SJW. With laws against hate speech I think the point that words have meanings and consequence is more easily made.

Those laws are wrong. If the law does not already proscibe speech due to its disturbing the peace, inciting violence, etc, then it should not be proscribed. Certainly offence should never enter into the debate.

Welcome back, btw.

Edited July 6, 2016 by bcsapper

[jacee]

I don't fear criticism for saying so, I live off of it.

I think that's a very curious statement.

One might think you're stuffed in a closet of your own making, feeding your own self-hatred.

.

Edited July 6, 2016 by jacee

[dialamah]

Those laws are wrong. If the law does not already proscibe speech due to its disturbing the peace, inciting violence, etc, then it should not be proscribed. Certainly offence should never enter into the debate.

According to Wikipedia, hate speech in Canada seems to specifically refer to supporting or condoning genocide, otherwise it's merely opinion even if its "revolting, disgusting and untrue".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_Canada

So I guess our only option is to castigate and ridicule racists, white supremists, radical anti-religionists, radical anti-whatever, at least until they start talking about genocide being the solution for their hated group(s). Free speech is safe, after all.

Welcome back, btw.

Thanks.

[taxme]

I think that's a very curious statement.

One might think you stuffed in a closet of your own making, feeding your own self-hatred.

.

In other words, carry on with your name calling, it does not scare me.

[taxme]

Such people don't believe they are deserving of castigation and ridicule. Instead they claim their detractors are trying to shut down discussion, are being politically correct or an SJW. With laws against hate speech I think the point that words have meanings and consequence is more easily made.

Why should anyone deserve to be castigated or ridiculed just because they have an opinion that is different to others? Everyone should have the opportunity to say how they feel and what is on their minds on any issue without being always labelled as a racist, nazi, white supremo or someone who hates others just for doing and saying so. It's plenty obvious here that there are lots of social justice warrior marxists here from their responses.

[taxme]

If it's just a matter of how YOU choose to live YOUR life, I'm inclined to live and let live.

If you're thinking everyone 'should/must' ascribe to your nonsense about not mixing races/maintaining white 'purity' ...

you can flock off.

That's the stuff that makes a racist into a Nazi.

.

I have not told anyone here how to live their lives. I have not told anyone here that they must ascribe to what I believe. But there you go again, trying to put words in my mouth. Anybody who does not ascribe to your beliefs well they just have to be a racist or nazi. More foolish talk coming from someone who follows the ziomarxist ideology. When one cannot debate then start with the name calling. That might work for some, but not for all.

[?Impact]

I have not told anyone here how to live their lives.

I suggest that saying "The white people will eventually become dumb downed if they continue on the race mixing path." is implicitly telling people how to live their lives. That is essentially the Aryan battle cry: die Herrenrasse.

[dialamah]

Why should anyone deserve to be castigated or ridiculed just because they have an opinion that is different to others? Everyone should have the opportunity to say how they feel and what is on their minds on any issue without being always labelled as a racist, nazi, white supremo or someone who hates others just for doing and saying so. It's plenty obvious here that there are lots of social justice warrior marxists here from their responses.

I'd say it depends on how they present their views: for example, a thread titled "Leftist Marxist Goons" is not respectful, nor a call for reasoned discourse of differing opinion, so why would that person expect their views to be taken seriously? If one really wanted to discuss the more violent behavior of *some* people of a particular political persuasion at Trump Rallies, vs. Clinton Rallies I'm sure they'd come up with a less provocative title. But name-calling in the title and OP makes it clear that that the writer doesn't want to 'discuss', they want to insult, ridicule and castigate. Why would such a person not expect the same in return? Perhaps people who are being referred to Nazi/white supremo/or someone who hates others should take a look at how they're presenting their views.

"The white people will eventually become dumb downed if they continue on the race mixing path." --- This does sound exactly like something a white supremo would say.

Edited July 6, 2016 by dialamah

[jacee]

Why should anyone deserve to be castigated or ridiculed just because they have an opinion that is different to others?

Because we disagree, and we have a right to speak our minds.

Everyone should have the opportunity to say how they feel and what is on their minds on any issue

You do.

without being always labelled as a racist, nazi, white supremo or someone who hates others just for doing and saying so.

Well no.

We have the right to speak freely too, to disagree with you, and call it what it is.

I'm not sure why that would bother you: You do speak white supremacist propaganda. Why deny it? Are you ashamed of it?

You say you live for criticism.

So ... enjoy it!

It's plenty obvious here that there are lots of social justice warrior marxists here from their responses.

So ...?

.

Edited July 6, 2016 by jacee

[Guest]

Such people don't believe they are deserving of castigation and ridicule. Instead they claim their detractors are trying to shut down discussion, are being politically correct or an SJW. With laws against hate speech I think the point that words have meanings and consequence is more easily made.

Laws against hate speech make us hypocrites and help to make the case that we are trying to shut down discussion. If rules are in place to prevent certain combinations of words from being uttered, speech is no longer free. Plus, who determines what combinations of words are taboo? For example, should a religion with political power be able to ban any anti-religious statements?

Hateful speech should have consequences, just not of the legal variety. Those like the Ann Coulters, Donald Trumps and Rush Limbaughs of the world need to be verbally ripped a new one every time they speak, they should be punished financially through voluntary boycotts of their products/services and sponsors, we should support and assist the targets of their hate....but they should still be free to utter vile hate if they so choose.