Atheism, Religion and related discussion


#337

So you’re a special subset of citizen that has rights and he doesn’t?

Fuck that noise.


#338

What’s all this got to do with anyone’s rights? I said Nazis deserve a punch in the face. Not that it should be legal to punch Nazis in the face.


#339

Do you not realize you’re the guy literally threatening other people’s freedom of speech? Your rhetoric is violent.

What the fuck is your belief system?


#340

lol

Have you heard a Nazi speak lately? Their worldview doesn’t get better until we are removed from it.


#341

I have heard Nazis speak. They are more than allowed to where I am from. Even if they say awful things, they haven’t done anything violent.

You’re literally an extremist.


#342

So are you telling everyone can punch guys who you dont agree with??


#343

Give them a chance. Their speech is literally a threat.

I’m saying that Nazis are absolute scum, and that sometimes it’s morally justifiable to use physical coercion to stop them.

But whatever. This has gotten way off topic.


#344

No, it’s literally not a threat to anyone until they literally start to threaten individuals.


#345

The fact you don’t think neo nazi ideology is a threat to individuals is troubling.


#346

The fact that you don’t understand the simple concept I am trying to convey is troubling.


#347

#348

Why its always have to be Nazi:/ I would punch Communist


#349

Because punching Nazis is so satisfying, even Captain America can’t resist.


#350

Neither can you understand his. I know that violence against the violent is wrong. No matter where you look at it, it’s bad. Sure. However, I believe Quinn is saying that allowing someone to have personal freedoms, so that person can use them to create movements that would directly remove the personal freedoms and/or other human rights and/or elements of our human constitution, then they should be censored and restrained. And going back ti the original sentence… despite it being wrong, and bad, sometimes it is fair to act violently on those who promote violence.

However, no. You may never have any kind of moral highground for falling below those you call scum @Quinn


#351

Exhibit A


#352

When did I claim that all violence is morally wrong or not justifiable? If the violence is necessary, sure, go for it. Being an asshole in public (saying offensive things like a Nazi might) is not grounds for getting punched in the face. One has to be a legitimate threat to necessitate violence.

Beyond that, it’s essentially vigilante behavior. I don’t know about you but my society does not promote vigilante justice.


#353

they call for ethnic cleansing. how is this not threatening individuals? besides, i won’t feel sorry for a nazi


#354

That, to me, falls entire to the religious leaders of said religious groups, who can influence followers of the religion. Sadly, in the case of ISIS, it took the Muslim leaders way too fucking long to finally denounce ISIS as not being Muslims and it is only after ISIS burned a Muslim pilot did they decide to do that. They’re hypocrites in my eyes for remaining silent on the issue until another Muslim got killed publicly.

Still, my original post primarily focus on what I was taught and yeah, I was taught that murdering people for a selfish cause immediately disqualifies you from being a Muslim. But as I’ve said, the ISIS terrorists believe they’re Muslims and kept preaching about it so it is difficult not to see them as an Islamic group. Still, I’d like to believe that intentions are more important than faith, and if they intend to “cleanse the influence of the West” through violence and take over the world, Muslim or not, they’re not earning brownie points with me. They’re a threat and must be eliminated.


#355

Because it’s a vague illegitimate threat against vast races of people, not individuals?


#356

Pick one.