Sorry, constitutional freedoms trump people being offended or intimidated.
Civil War museum gets rid of Confederate flag on new logo
- Thread starter Guno צְבִי
- Start date
Sorry, constitutional freedoms trump people being offended or intimidated.
Wait a second, you said earlier that intimidation is not protected speech.
So once again, you are reversing your argument mid-stream instead of just admitting you're on the wrong side.
What a douche.
Your definition of intimidation does not match any legal definition. Having your feelings hurt is not an element of that crime.
So that's what you're going with?
The legal definition of "intimidation" is: "intentional behavior that "would cause a person of ordinary sensibilities" to fear injury or harm."
The Confederate flag, by your own account, represents white supremacy and slavery.
So since when are white supremacy and slavery not something to be afraid of which causes injury or harm? I mean what do you think slavery is?
Unless you are going to argue that black people don't have ordinary sensibilities. That's the only way you can make your argument that the Confederate Flag isn't a tool of intimidation and oppression. Therefore, when I said you invalidate them, this is specifically to what I'm referring.
Last edited:
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Including the Constitutional freedom to own slaves even though it offends and intimidates people?
That dumbass said about a dozen posts ago that intimidation is not protected free speech, then he goes to say the Constitution gives you the freedom to intimidate others.
He doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground.
Flash's cognitive dissonance is showing:
You have to cut him some slack, he's old and easily confused.
Slavery is not a constitutional freedom because of amendments.
I don't think there is support to repeal the 1st amendment to stop people from displaying a flag or symbol, spout offensive or hate speech, or the many other freedoms just because some or all are uncomfortable with it.
The Bill of Rights prohibit any (unreasonable) infringements because they knew some people would always be willing to restrict the rights of an unpopular minority.
That is not cognitive dissonance. It is your lack of understanding what illegal intimidation constitutes.
When I say intimidation is not a freedom I obviously mean real intimidation, not your definition of anything that might offend someone's liberal sensibilities because of views you find offensive.
Cognitive dissonance is supporting free expression except when you disagree with the content.
Exactly. Waving a flag is not intimidation.
People aren't allowed to make up their own versions of what constitutes intimidation.
You said, flatly, that intimidation is not a freedom.
Then you said, flatly again, that it is.
So you reversed your position, and you don't seem to care because what's more important for you is not giving anyone the satisfaction of you admitting that you're full of shit.
Wow. You hear that black people? All that shit perpetrated by those waving the flag, and by waving the flag itself since the Civil War is just offensive to your sensibilities, so get over it because Flash has.
Oh and he has empathy...or sympathy...or neither. Yeah, neither. Let's go with that.
But you said yourself that the content is representative of white supremacy and slavery, which are intimidation, aren't they?
Well maybe not to you because you're white and never were a slave, and didn't have any ancestors who were.
So you cannot possibly empathize because you don't have the capacity to do so.
Because you're a sociopath.
Sure it is, that's why they waved it atop public buildings and parades during Reconstruction, Jim Crow, Segregation, and MAGA.
Ah, but they are allowed to erase history? You said that was fascist.
Because that's what you do when you wave that dumb thing outside of a museum, where it is placed in order "to give a complete picture of the culture and history of the Civil War".
So not only have you reversed your position on the erasing of history, you've also reversed your position on intimidation.
All because you don't want to give some anonymous person on a message board the satisfaction that you're full of shit.
It obviously was not illegal intimidation since no one was arrested or ever would be.
This is boring. You keep saying the same thing over and over even though we all know we will never get rid of the 1st amendment--so all your proposals are moot (and fascist).
So you wouldn't consider it intimidation if I waved a flag that depicted your house on fire, your family's charred corpses in front, you hanging from a tree, with me laughing and dancing around the whole scene holding a lit match and gas can, and then placed that flag everywhere you went, had all your neighbors fly it, every day, for your entire life?
Yeah fucking right. You'd go crying to the police so fast.
Why don't you start a campaign to get the flag banned and arrest everybody who displays it. Get back to me when you have been successful. I won't hold my breath.
OMG...Flash it was placed there by the people who wrote the laws.
They did it specifically to intimidate freed slaves and their descendants.
So you're pondering why none of them went to jail for doing so? Well, that's because they wrote the laws and they took the action to do it.
Wow. You're just flailing right now.
Wait a second - I also noticed how you casually moved the bar to "illegal intimidation" where before you said intimidation was not a freedom. So...which is it? Is intimidation a freedom or not?
The reason this is repetitive is because of your circular, masturbatory arguments.