buddhist
Well-Known Member
Agreed, that's the magnificence of the First Amendment, at least in these united States.
When speech crosses over into force and violence, that is when I condemn it.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What Is A Social Justice Warrior?
- Thread starter Rival
- Start date
When speech crosses over into force and violence, that is when I condemn it.
Baladas
An Págánach
Agreed. I only recently (within the last several months) learned about Gandhi's relationship with Hitler, as well as his suggestion that the Jews should have killed themselves during WWII. I lost all love I had for this man that used to be one of my greatest inspirations.
He was my hero.
I didn't know about the things he said regarding women, especially the bit about rape. That's atrocious.
I'm doing my best to honestly interpret the US's 1st amendment. And I think the 1st amendment is awesome. To me it's the foundation of successful society.
Would you say societies which do not have the 1st Amendment to the American Constitution as part of their legislation are therefore unsuccessful?
VioletVortex
Well-Known Member
Someone who believes that they are an "individual", that their life has value, and that they should go on some form of "crusade" to implement their views. I'm tired of people claiming to be individuals. That is a sacred title as far as I'm concerned. Maybe it's applicable, maybe it's not. That's not relevant currently.
SJWs will go around and ***** about how everyone is a good, valuable person, and deserving of some sort of reward for their mere existence. Yet, many are borderline terrorists. Throwing tear gas into a Taake concert borderlines on terrorism. When they reach their graves, they will find out how much their lives are really worth.
People die, people feel pain, bad things happen, however, good can come from them. That's simply how life works.
SJWs will go around and ***** about how everyone is a good, valuable person, and deserving of some sort of reward for their mere existence. Yet, many are borderline terrorists. Throwing tear gas into a Taake concert borderlines on terrorism. When they reach their graves, they will find out how much their lives are really worth.
People die, people feel pain, bad things happen, however, good can come from them. That's simply how life works.
People who take the "Social" and "Warrior" part of the epithet much too seriously, and the "Justice" part not nearly enough.
I wouldn't say it's cool at all, but it's definitely within their rights. Silencing or censoring even outlandish speech or ideas is not Freedom of Speech.
Views on this tend to differ across the Atlantic.
Those who riot and destroy property need to be more than demonized, they need to be put in jail. It is a sorry start in our country when rioters and looters are defended.
It is not within their rights to destroy others property.
Curious George
Veteran Member
MeGo.
No one said it was. Try not to comment on things without reading them in context.
Freedom of Speech is on our US Constitution which only applies to this country, so I'm not surprised to hear that.
The "whining" going on is by those objecting to the term, "SJW".
It's not by those wielding it (who are quite happy with it).
Is this one of those trying-to-turn-the-table posts,
like a fundie accusing atheists of having great faith?
Last edited:
The whining isn't over the term; the whining is over what the "SJWs" are doing that the person complaining objectd to.
No, it's one of those calling-out-hypocrisy posts.
Shad
Veteran Member
No they have a right to protest not a right to an equal platform to what they are protesting. If I host an event with speakers that are protested I am not obligated to give protestors a platform nor equal time by any law. They can get their own platform.
It is clear that you see this comment as having some relevance to what I posted. In an attempt to figure out what that is - are you using the slur SJW to refer to all progressive people? To anyone who riots? Who is it you see as being rightly demonised, and how does this relate to the SJW label?
If you mean rioters and forceful protestors generally - people said the same about the Suffragettes, about the civil rights movement, about the Stonewall rioters, whatever. By definition, most protestors are not going to be supported by the majority during their own time, or they wouldn't have needed to be protesting.
Us backwards countries will catch up with y'all one day <3
OK, fair enough, but I don't that their protesting to get one is out of bounds.
It may not have been you but someone was defending the rioters. That is part of the context of this thread.
What I said is in plain, easy to understand English. NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO DESTROY PROPERTY. THEY SHOULD BE PUT IN JAIL.
“Whatever their bodies do affects their souls. It is funny how mortals always picture us as putting things into their minds: in reality our best work is done by keeping things out...”
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters