[Mustang1]

Biggles Biggles:

Once again - freedom of speech is a right granted by God, human governments have no right to limit freedom of speech and any attempt by them to do so renders them illegitimate.
.

If freedom of speech is a right granted by God, why do the Ten Commandments limit individual freedoms? Keep running from this, but i'll keep reminding you of your spectacular screw up.

[Dayseed]

Biggles Biggles:

Once again - freedom of speech is a right granted by God, human governments have no right to limit freedom of speech and any attempt by them to do so renders them illegitimate.

Uh-oh. Once again, your biblical argument gets smashed. Explain the "Thou shalt not bear false witness" commandment if God wanted people to have unbridled freedom of speech. Also, where in the bible would I find God granting this freedom? Lastly, how come you don't agree that libel laws and the ones I've been citing are secular government's upholding of God's Commandment? You should be cheering these Giggles the Bigot-Clown!

$1:

A more specific objection to this purported 'crime' is the assumption that shouting fire in a crowded theatre will inevitably result in needless death. Humans are still agents of free will - they are obliged to act responsibly and not trample people even if they are scared. If they do trample people they are responsible for the injuries caused.

It's a reasonably foreseeable consequence, which is what the crime is all about. Secondly, your argument falls flat. The Courts have long recognized that a reaction to a panic is a mitigating circumstance whereas an action causing a panic is an aggravating one. According to your stupid scenario, if car a drives into the rear of car b, it was car b's responsibility as an "agent of free-will" not to have been in the path of car a and thus, car b is responsible for the ensuing accident.

Fuck you are one dumb monkey, aren't you?

$1:

I haven't failed yet - nor am I likely to if this is the best you can do. The breathlessness that you are feeling is due to your long-winded posts.

Oh my God Giggles the Bigot-Clown, you remind me of a Soundgarden song:

He failed and he failed miserably
He failed and he failed quite bad,
He failed and he failed miserably,
What's better, he never even had to try...

I'm excited for you to reconcile God's granting of unbridled free speech with the 10 Commandments.

[Dayseed]

Biggles Biggles:

Amusing as it is to wind you up and set you off - I'm wondering if you might be suffering from some kind of dyslexic attack or possibly Tourette's syndrome. Perhaps you should seek professional help - or at least a course in logic and common sense?

Uh-oh, Giggles the Bigot-Clown is trying to divert attention away from the salient questions he can't answer regarding his posts! However, it's interesting that you think swearing and dyslexia go hand in hand. Well, I guess for the poor teacher responsible for teaching you to read, they did!

Zing!

[Mustang1]

Biggles Biggles:

$1:

Jumping Wireless Broadband Router Christ!

Jumping fuck-doodles!

Giggles the Bigot-Clown

Motherfuck, you moron

Amusing as it is to wind you up and set you off - I'm wondering if you might be suffering from some kind of dyslexic attack or possibly Tourette's syndrome. Perhaps you should seek professional help - or at least a course in logic and common sense?

What's a dyslexic attack?

[Mustang1]

Biggles Biggles:

$1:

$1:

Government won't protect either the minority or the majority long term by doing away with freedom of speech. The most important use of freedom of speech is to protect the people from the government.

You know we have courts, right Giggles the Bigot-Clown? If Canada’s government turns into a tyrannical dictatorship, which is the only scenario in which your idiocy can exist, there won’t be anybody to enforce freedom of speech. Fuck you are one dumb monkey, aren’t you Giggles the Bigot-Clown?

Are you aware that you're repeating yourself? This is a well-characterized feature of Tourette's syndrome.

They have courts in Zimbabwe also. Not too long ago I imagine that Rhodesian jurisprudence was of a similar quality to Canada's today. Now Zimbabwe is a tyrannical dictatorship. Freedom of speech was not the only right of the people that was taken away - but it was one of the first.

$1:

Biggles


Once again - freedom of speech is a right granted by God, human governments have no right to limit freedom of speech and any attempt by them to do so renders them illegitimate.

If freedom of speech is a right granted by God, why do the Ten Commandments limit individual freedoms? Keep running from this, but i'll keep reminding you of your spectacular screw up.

The guy with a penchant for constantly repeating his cowardly acts is commenting on others? Troll off, hypocrite

[Dayseed]

Biggles Biggles:

Yes that is what I am saying - you see, you can learn!

People like Blacks in Canada now. At other times in Canadian history various minority groups were viewed with disapproval. If at some point in the future, Canadians were to decide that they dissapproved of Blacks they might start to oppress them.

Um. People like Blacks in Canada now? Who are the "people" to whom you refer that "like" black people? Tread lightly Giggles the Bigot-Clown because your true stripes are really, really starting to show.

And your example is predicated on the for instance that Canada would suddenly turn into a bigoted country oppressing blacks? What, in your hideous example, caused this?

$1:

As long as freedom of speech exists Blacks would be able to complain about their opression. Other people in Canada or around the world could hear their complaints and attempt to aid them.

This example is getting fucking creepy. Canada, in it's bigoted zealotry would cut off communication with the outside world?

$1:

If freedom of speech is outlawed under the guise of preventing 'Hate' speech then these people would not have the option of complaining and seeking assistance from abroad.

Ah, but here you have a problem you recently dodged. What constitutes "hate speech" and from whence do you get your definition of it? According to you, it doesn't exist.

$1:

How does this work? Easy - the Black Canadians complain that the White Canadians are oppressing them and give examples. The White Canadians refer to these examples, claim that they haven't done these things and that they are being defamed (hate speech). Do you understand now?

Okay Giggles the Bigot-Clown, you've really over-reached your intellectual limits. If this supposed oppression is true, then defamatory libel doesn't apply. There are no other routes available during your racial defamation. The Supreme Court ruled in Irwin Toy Ltd v. Quebec that the government may curtail freedom of speech when the result of that restriction is the prevention of physical consequence. In your fucked up example, the white people aren't preventing physical consequence by limiting the black people's freedom of speech.

What's really fucked up is that you STILL HAVEN'T PRODUCED ONE "HATE SPEECH" LAW TO HANG YOUR ARGUMENT ON. Do you undestand that yet Giggles the Bigot-Clown? You've got no laws upon which this could even be predicated.

$1:

This kind of thing goes on all the time in most countries in the world. I'm surprised you're not more cognizant of this fact - but then again, you don't seem to get out much.

Really? Name them and give examples. In the mean time, have fun imagining scenarios where black people finally get oppressed again. Fuck you're one sick monkey, aren't you?

[Dayseed]

Biggles Biggles:

Are you aware that you're repeating yourself? This is a well-characterized feature of Tourette's syndrome.

Says the guy who apes his own quote that freedom of speech is a right of God, not man. Get a clue Giggles the Bigot-Clown.

$1:

They have courts in Zimbabwe also. Not too long ago I imagine that Rhodesian jurisprudence was of a similar quality to Canada's today. Now Zimbabwe is a tyrannical dictatorship. Freedom of speech was not the only right of the people that was taken away - but it was one of the first.

What on Earth are you saying? Do you have anything of substance to support your attack that the courts in Canada are on the verge of collapse against protecting Canadians against tyranny? I notice that you had to use the word "imagine" to justify your other idiot point.

Do you have any idea that scenario that would have to apply to have the courts in Canada of surrendering their authority to the legislative branch? It would have to be cataclysmic.

Fuck, if you're just living in fantasy land, don't expect others to have to follow suit Giggles the Bigot Clown.

[Dayseed]

Biggles Biggles:

If the Canadian government has written down rules for what people can say they have wasted their time. People can say whatever they want - any attempt to regulate speech renders the government illegitimate.

Oh Lord, you're not going to do this biblical nonsense again, are you? Also, you know that not everybody believes in your God, right? Have you reconciled God's freedom of speech with the 5th Commandment?

$1:

If you have read these rules you are a fool - but then we already knew that.

Haven't you seen me quoting them? Fuck you're thick. Also, where is this "we" shit? Who stands with Giggles the Bigot-Clown? Stand and announce yourself! Otherwise, you've just invented imaginary support for yourself.

$1:

If you are going to attempt to defend these rules you are going to get an ass-whooping - just as you are getting now.

If ass-whooping is watching you invent biblical-based dodges that is...

$1:

No I cannot - my knowledge of the bible is not extensive enough.

So, you don't know if God has or hasn't granted this?!?!?!?! THIS HAS BEEN YOUR GO-TO COP-OUT for pages now! And you can't even back it up! Holy screaming Mythbusters Mary! Giggles the Bigot-Clown, you've got absolutely nothing! Not a goddamn thing!

$1:

But the founding fathers of the United States were better versed in the bible than I am. The Declaration of Independence is based on natural or "inalienable rights" as being endowed by the Divine Creator or Nature's God to every human being, arguing that it was "self-evident" truth that human beings by their very nature inherently have and seek to experience the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The right to freedom of speech is included amongst these rights.

What is this? Did you just spend the past two hours googling various terms and this is the best you can come up with? Where is "Freedom of Speech" included in it? Only you, and you alone, claim it's what Jefferson meant in his drafting! Fuck, freedom of speech didn't even make it into the US Constitution on its first passing, it had to be included in the first amendment!

So, let's recap: You haven't any biblical knowledge that God gave man freedom of speech; you're guessing that Thomas Jefferson had probably meant for freedom of speech to be included in the Declaration of Independence and thus, derived that belief from the Bible and you haven't YET reconciled "Thou shalt not bear false witness" with God's granting.

That, Giggles the Bigot-Clown, is probably the biggest, single colossal blunder EVER witnessed on this board.

$1:

Doubtless as an imperfect human being I have many failings - but I am not wrong in this case. Perhaps you have many good points that we haven't seen yet, but your position versus freedom of speech is not one of them.

Uh, for the guy who's inventing biblical rationale, I'll take my chances.

$1:

If the charter of which you speak restricts freedom of speech then it is not I, but rather Canada's government that has impeached itself.

You haven't even read the fucking Charter of Rights and Freedoms but you're commenting on Freedom of Speech? How fucking incredulous are you? Do you have no shame?

[Dayseed]

Biggles Biggles:

Your homosexuality doesn't bother me but I don't think this is the appropriate forum for you to express it.

Says the guy who keeps demanding to know where my semen is and cruises gay websites so he can recommend them to others. You're just not a one-trick bigot, are you Giggles the Bigot-Clown?

Hey, have you reconciled your belief that freedom of speech is an inalienable right from God despite God demolishing it in the 10 Commandments?

Because what that means is: you've lost ALL secular arguments to me. It's that simple. I won and you lost. You can't refute ANY of them, so you've only got that one left.

And I blew it to smithereens too.

Come on Giggles the Bigot-Clown, I'm just waiting for your inevitable surrender.