Quote:
Originally Posted by mcgeedo
I'm fascinated that someone (anyone) who claims intelligence would suggest castration or the other forms of punishment/control etc. that have been thrown around regarding Conservapedia.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
You wouldn't call essentially blaming Charles Darwin for the holocaust hate speech? I can't imagine a worse way to offend truth. Charles Dawrin managed to answer one of the fundamental questions of man—where did we come from?—and because it offends some very ignorant people they're trying to associate him with one of the worst crimes in the history of our species. I mean holy crap.
I'm not talking actual castration, but the place is evil from my perspective. Nothing on it even attempts at being correct. It is the most pure form of intellectual dishonesty that I've ever come across.
There are some things that shouldn't be tolerated, which is why we have laws. We don't tolerate murder, theft, rape, and more extreme forms of lying. Defamation is illegal for a reason.
|
He clarified his position here. He says the defamation part is illegal, and he clarifies his position on the castration/other insults. There's far worse on Conservapedia.
Quote:
Originally Posted by levite
Legally, of course I would tolerate Conservapedia: maybe it's hate speech, and maybe it isn't, but until there is direct proof that the speech has resulted in actions taken, they are protected by the First Amendment.
...
But as much as I support the legal notion that Conservapedia has the right to spew its filth, Will and I also have the right to denounce it for the ignorant, cowardly, cold-hearted, monstrous perversions of truth and compassion that it is.
|
I find this quite intellectually sound, and don't think there's anything wrong with what they've said.
Neither do I think you wrong in reshaping your opinion on members from this topic.