Who decided I can't whip my dick out at Taco Bell?
If you live in America and only in America, its a free country! You can do anything you want! A land of opportunity!
Oh boy. What a nice day to enjoy a Beefy 5 Layer Burrito. I sure do hope this fine meal isn't ruined by unwittingly witnessing someone's genitals
God dammit this reminded me of this song lol
Specifically the "laying my dick on the table" line.
It's also just such a leap from what that question ought to imply which is "this is a hard problem, power like that is ripe for abuse, and so we should think carefully about how to implement something like this." Instead, the suggestion is that just asking the question "who decides" should constitute an argument for "nobody, because it's too hard to even try." I absolutely loathe this all-too-common attitude of thinking that social organization problems are hard, and therefore we should never try to improve anything under any circumstances.
Jesus this is such a thought terminating cliche. Who gets to decide fucking anything? Who decided murder should be illegal? Who decided dumping toxic waste into reservoirs? Who decided I can't whip my dick out at Taco Bell?
It's all dressed up and fancy "DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" thinking.
What a fucking coward.
These libs are the folks who say that they'd stand up to the nazis if they were in 1940s. They won't even fight back against nazis on an internet forum.
I mean scratch a liberal and you'll see why.
They're already doing that to cover up the fact that they're shitting themselves in anger that leftists are insisting that people who volunteered to wear SS uniforms were Nazis.
"the problem with moderation is that someone has to do the moderating" we got a fuckin genius over here folks
"Because something has arbitrary and difficult characteristics and the goal is continuous, it's best not to even try lol"
"The problem with reducing poverty is what if there are still poor people? Huh? Have you thought about that, liberal?"
What is poverty really? The problem with poverty reduction is that you have to have someone who defines what poverty is!
The problem with laws is someone has to enforce it. No more laws
The thing is none of these fucking libs actually believe in free speech, they're just too dumb to realize it.
1000% chance they believe in laws against insider trading, false advertising, perjury, death threats, sedition, leaking classified intelligence, libel and copyright violation.
they all wanted to de-fed from us for being "pro-Russia"
Many of them did
"Free Speech" my ass, they like pedophiles more than they like communists
laws against insider trading, false advertising, perjury, death threats, sedition, leaking classified intelligence, libel and copyright violation
With exceptions for Adults In The Room that Make Hard Decisions to Get Shit Done like in their treats.
CW: murder, CSE, abuse
Libel, slander, false advertising, blackmail, scamming, identity theft, death threats, terrorist threats, fraud, unregulated claims regarding health or nutrition, perjury, extortion, child grooming, verbal abuse, (I know this one probably doesn't apply to you Nakoichi but...) treason.
Show me a true believer in free speech absolutism and I'll show you a hypocrite.
The only person who would be okay with this stuff is either a blind ideologue or someone who wants get away with doing this stuff themselves.
I think this is underestimating the power of privileged male Libertarian brain. Ideology is powerful and they will side with it over the obvious correct moral decision to not allow dangerous false advertising, for example.
goddammit, it really always comes down to "how do you know bad things are bad actually??? that's what i thought, tankie fascist"
Why do these
dipshits always say it's bad when Nazis are forced into echo chambers? Seems pretty obvious that when they were on their own pathetic sites like Stormfront (original, not 
), there were a hell of a lot fewer Nazis around. It's when they got onto more widespread spaces like 4chan and Reddit thanks to lax moderation and muh peach freedom we saw a marked increase in Nazis because they were able to actively recruit.This comment is so fancy looking though lol I'm still not used to it
@flashgnash@lemm.ee come on in here and defend your bullshit in your precious free marketplace of ideas. Stop addressing the other people that are being more generous than you deserve show your ass.
I've responded to people who are being civil and not making absurd demands like "muh respond now respond now hey pay attention to me or ban!!11!"
I've responded to people who are being civil
May @Civility@hexbear.net have mercy for you, crybully cryptofascist, because you'll get nothing but dunks from the rest of us.
You gave a nonanswer about furries and wouldn't even specify the slur in your probably made up gmod story.
Not specifying the slur because that makes it personal and then people's emotions get involved
I noticed you didn't respond to my comment, and I didn't think I was being too uncivil, not that I really care about civility when it comes to tired muh frozen peaches arguments.
The furry thing is just a weird thing to bring up, who's really hung up on banning furries anymore?
Might not be the case anymore but they definitely used to be
Sorry if I missed your comment I've taken to just clicking clear all when it looks like all of them aren't worth responding to
Haven't heard this term before, what's a frozen peaches argument?
Free speech = freeze peach, which I often twist into more ridiculous forms like ”frozen peaches” or ”freedom of peach” for my own amusement.
oops forgot to post the link it's there now, this person deserves to be bullied.
you can always find people who agree with you
Where can you find nazis and pedos agreeing with nazis and pedos?
Where can you find nazis and pedos agreeing with nazis and pedos?
small group of people deciding what's acceptable
In a community that refuses to do anything about Nazis, that small group of people is the Nazis. There's a reason that nobody with the barest minimum of compassion can be found in any communities that allow them. Freedom to express yourself as a minority does not meaningfully exist if you're likely to encounter genocidal rhetoric in response.
In the 1950s, these same people would be saying that segregation isn't oppressive because it counts as the exercise of voluntary association.
Fairly sure there's still a widespread consensus that pedos are bad and shouldn't be encouraged to do pedo shit. There was a consensus about Nazis, too, until about a week ago. Personally, I would sleep very well knowing that Nazis and pedos get shut the fuck up online. Or in person. Less than zero fucks given for their feelings or their expression rights. No, that's not right. I want them to feel bad and silenced.
At least they'll finally be the victims they always claim to be
There is no slippery slope. You can actually quite easily define what is and isn't acceptable speech. When there's an edge case, simply debate and edit the law for next time. Don't these nerds like democracy and the rule of law??
Liberals hate democracy. That's why there are so many distortions about who counts as a valid participant (no kids, few immigrants, no felons, etc). The idea of granting any kind of power to the unwashed masses terrifies them.
The irony, if course, is that to the haute bourgeoisie they are almost all viewed as the unwashed. But then the working class libs do like it that way. They're easily convinced that under-educated, incompetent, and ignorant but rich or elected people are the best placed to make key decisions over our lives.
Society built on the notion that the one in the suit knows what they're doing because of the way they dress and speak and inject baby parts into their faces.
How about we compromise? Nazis and pedos should be shot with a silencer
"nazis and pedos should be silenced"
"nazis and pedos should be shot"
