University forces professor to change syllabus that threatened to dismiss students who argue against BLM, abortion or same-sex marriage

submitted by Vigte from cnn.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]wuzizname 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I can agree with “hate speech” laws only if the speech is overt and specifically calls for violence against a distinguishable group.

So “fuck purple people, we should kill all purple people” would qualify. “I don’t like purple people” would not.

Trouble is, slippery slope, we had someone call his MP a “cunt” and a “bitch” in Ottawa the other week and he’s being investigated for hate speech now.

[–]Yin 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's not what "hate speech" laws are in other countries, though. Hate speech laws in western nations are used to censor and imprison white people who don't want to be replaced and genocided and have their countries invaded and have open borders. Literally bluecheckmark influencers by the hundreds laugh about "killing whitey" all the time, not to mention the millions who aren't influencers who laugh about "killing whitey". Nothing happens, because the people who run society have anti-white ideology.

[–]jet199 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Laws against calls to violence already existed.

Hate speech is about offence.