Quote:

Don't like gay marriage? Don't get one. Don't like abortions? Don't get one. Don't like drugs? Don't do them. Don't like sex? Don't have it. Don't like your rights taken away? Don't take away anyone else's.

Cant remember who said this but makes sense.

SOB

too true

Who, exactly do you think is taking away others rights?

It seems the right to simply hold an opinion is on borrowed time, with the leftwad thought police on the march.  The very same leftwad thought police who champion such "initiatives" as gay marriage, abortion, drug legalisation....

... wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 1:17pm:

Who, exactly do you think is taking away others rights? It seems the right to simply hold an opinion is on borrowed time, with the leftwad thought police on the march.  The very same leftwad thought police who champion such "initiatives" as gay marriage, abortion, drug legalisation....

you do ... every time you vote on what I can or can't do

... wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 1:17pm:

Who, exactly do you think is taking away others rights? It seems the right to simply hold an opinion is on borrowed time, with the leftwad thought police on the march.  The very same leftwad thought police who champion such "initiatives" as gay marriage, abortion, drug legalisation....

You sure its the leftards??

Leftards would allow these things & leave it to you whether you used/did them or not.

Rightards/Conservatives want the "Group Think" of bad so outlaw/forbid.

Which sounds more controlling?

Johnsmith wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 1:18pm:

... wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 1:17pm: Who, exactly do you think is taking away others rights? It seems the right to simply hold an opinion is on borrowed time, with the leftwad thought police on the march.  The very same leftwad thought police who champion such "initiatives" as gay marriage, abortion, drug legalisation.... you do ... every time you vote on what I can or can't do

I don't recall ever voting on what you can or can't do.

I take noones rights away.

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 1:20pm:

... wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 1:17pm: Who, exactly do you think is taking away others rights? It seems the right to simply hold an opinion is on borrowed time, with the leftwad thought police on the march.  The very same leftwad thought police who champion such "initiatives" as gay marriage, abortion, drug legalisation.... You sure its the leftards?? Leftards would allow these things & leave it to you whether you used/did them or not. Rightards/Conservatives want the "Group Think" of bad so outlaw/forbid. Which sounds more controlling?

The mainstream right is by no means guilt-free.  They seem to have formed an unholy alliance with the left, so yes, I am wrong to place blame solely on the left, but that's where the lions share must go.   

What is the problem here? Something wrong with the quote I put up?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 1:55pm:

What is the problem here? Something wrong with the quote I put up? SOB

Don't think so,
Tolerator was just venting one of his confused anti left rants.

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 2:11pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 1:55pm: What is the problem here? Something wrong with the quote I put up? SOB Don't think so, Tolerator was just venting one of his confused anti left rants.

Venting, yes.

Confused, no.

... wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 1:32pm:

Johnsmith wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 1:18pm: ... wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 1:17pm: Who, exactly do you think is taking away others rights? It seems the right to simply hold an opinion is on borrowed time, with the leftwad thought police on the march.  The very same leftwad thought police who champion such "initiatives" as gay marriage, abortion, drug legalisation.... you do ... every time you vote on what I can or can't do I don't recall ever voting on what you can or can't do. I take noones rights away.

ahhh, but you did ... the last eletion you voted for a party that either stood for those things or didn't ... probably wasn't your first consideration when you voted for them, but nevertheless you voted for or against it

Johnsmith wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 2:56pm:

... wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 1:32pm: Johnsmith wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 1:18pm: ... wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 1:17pm: Who, exactly do you think is taking away others rights? It seems the right to simply hold an opinion is on borrowed time, with the leftwad thought police on the march.  The very same leftwad thought police who champion such "initiatives" as gay marriage, abortion, drug legalisation.... you do ... every time you vote on what I can or can't do I don't recall ever voting on what you can or can't do. I take noones rights away. ahhh, but you did ... the last eletion you voted for a party that either stood for those things or didn't ... probably wasn't your first consideration when you voted for them, but nevertheless you voted for or against it

Ahh but I didn't.  Last election, I defaced the ballot paper, as none of the candidates did anything for me.

What iS this obsession with "rights" anyway?  What 'rights" are inalienable?  Of these, which have been "taken away" and by whom?  You must be careful not to fall into the comon leftwad trap of calling everything they want their "right". 

Quote:

Don't like gay marriage? Don't get one. Don't like abortions? Don't get one. Don't like drugs? Don't do them. Don't like sex? Don't have it. Don't like your rights taken away? Don't take away anyone else's.

Its a good quote. Just saying it again.

SOB

... wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 3:20pm:

Johnsmith wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 2:56pm: ... wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 1:32pm: Johnsmith wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 1:18pm: ... wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 1:17pm: Who, exactly do you think is taking away others rights? It seems the right to simply hold an opinion is on borrowed time, with the leftwad thought police on the march.  The very same leftwad thought police who champion such "initiatives" as gay marriage, abortion, drug legalisation.... you do ... every time you vote on what I can or can't do I don't recall ever voting on what you can or can't do. I take noones rights away. ahhh, but you did ... the last eletion you voted for a party that either stood for those things or didn't ... probably wasn't your first consideration when you voted for them, but nevertheless you voted for or against it Ahh but I didn't.  Last election, I defaced the ballot paper, as none of the candidates did anything for me. What iS this obsession with "rights" anyway?  What 'rights" are inalienable?  Of these, which have been "taken away" and by whom?  You must be careful not to fall into the comon leftwad trap of calling everything they want their "right".

Who are these 'thought police' you complained of earlier? Can you tell the difference between people pointing out how wrong you are and trying to ban you from having an opinion?

freediver wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 6:23pm:

... wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 3:20pm: Johnsmith wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 2:56pm: ... wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 1:32pm: Johnsmith wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 1:18pm: ... wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 1:17pm: Who, exactly do you think is taking away others rights? It seems the right to simply hold an opinion is on borrowed time, with the leftwad thought police on the march.  The very same leftwad thought police who champion such "initiatives" as gay marriage, abortion, drug legalisation.... you do ... every time you vote on what I can or can't do I don't recall ever voting on what you can or can't do. I take noones rights away. ahhh, but you did ... the last eletion you voted for a party that either stood for those things or didn't ... probably wasn't your first consideration when you voted for them, but nevertheless you voted for or against it Ahh but I didn't.  Last election, I defaced the ballot paper, as none of the candidates did anything for me. What iS this obsession with "rights" anyway?  What 'rights" are inalienable?  Of these, which have been "taken away" and by whom?  You must be careful not to fall into the comon leftwad trap of calling everything they want their "right".  Who are these 'thought police' you complained of earlier? Can you tell the difference between people pointing out how wrong you are and trying to ban you from having an opinion?

Sure - if I am in fact wrong. 

But it's not lies that are silenced -  It is inconvenient truths.  Lies don't need to be silenced, they can just be disproven.  But where cold hard facts don't fit the narrative, they must be suppressed.

http://takimag.com/article/10_hatefacts_for_those_who_hate_facts_gavin_mcinnes/print#axzz1uFWwK6jF

Freedom is the fredom to say that 2+2 = 4.

I don't have an issue in gay people having relationships etc and having it recognized.

Where I draw the line is how they behave in public.

I don't want to have my children subject to two guys holding hands and copping off in public.
It's common decency.

Quote:

Sure - if I am in fact wrong. But it's not lies that are silenced -  It is inconvenient truths.  Lies don't need to be silenced, they can just be disproven.  But where cold hard facts don't fit the narrative, they must be suppressed. http://takimag.com/article/10_hatefacts_for_those_who_hate_facts_gavin_mcinnes/p... Freedom is the fredom to say that 2+2 = 4.

Haven't you just proven that you do have that freedom and no-one is taking it away from you? Freedom of speech is not the same thing as freedom from ridicule, or the right to demand respect for whatever silly thing you want to say.

freediver wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 7:22pm:

Haven't you just proven that you do have that freedom and no-one is taking it away from you? Freedom of speech is not the same thing as freedom from ridicule.

So you think people can speak the truth about anything, anywhere at any time? 

No. In some places you can get stoned to death for it.

I hope this clears things up for you.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 7:22pm:

I don't have an issue in gay people having relationships etc and having it recognized. Where I draw the line is how they behave in public. I don't want to have my children subject to two guys holding hands and copping off in public. It's common decency.

Yeah. I dont like heteros doing that either. Dont think it should be against the law though.

SOB

I have found that people often misinterpret what you are doing while holding hands and copping off in public.

freediver wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 7:31pm:

No. In some places you can get stoned to death for it. I hope this clears things up for you.

yes, and in other places you can lose your job,and have your whole life ruined.

but that could never happen here.


Quote:

The Parramatta Sun controversy           In 2005, Andrew Fraser, an Associate Professor of law at Macquarie University, wrote a short letter to his local paper, the Parramatta Sun, protesting against the immigration of Somalians into Australia, stating that African migrants were known to be associated with high levels of violence.[1]

http://www.ironbarkresources.com/defendingfreespeech/dfs01freespeech.htm
         

Are you suggesting that your employer should not be able to hold you accountable for idiotic things you put out on the company letterhead?

freediver wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 7:58pm:

Are you suggesting that your employer should not be able to hold you accountable for idiotic things you put out on the company letterhead?

You didnt read the story.  :'(

"But where cold hard facts don't fit the narrative, they must be suppressed.

http://takimag.com/article/10_hatefacts_for_those_who_hate_facts_gavin_mcinnes/p..."


Can't argue with that or I'll get shot. There were 2.41 facts per example, and the writer definitely has those opinions which mix with facts like communist economics. So sit down and listen how to be tolerant of what's right.

Quote:

ADELAIDE recruiter Matthew Rendell has quit after admitting he told AFL officials he would not draft an Aboriginal player unless they had one white parent.

http://www.afl.com.au/tabid/208/default.aspx?newsid=130867

Another good man thrown under the PC bus. 

But remeber people - we live in a free country.

now repeat after me;


we live in a free country
we live in a free country
we live in a free country
we live in a free country
we live in a free country

Our good friends across the tasman are not beyond the grasp of the thought police either.


Quote:

TAMPON maker Libra has apologised after its new ad was branded "outrageously transphobic" and caused a storm of controversy on social media websites. In a statement issued tonight, Libra said it regrets any offence taken to the New Zealand television commercial, which implied transgender people are not real women because they don't menstruate. "It was never intended to upset or offend anyone. Independent research was undertaken and the advertisement was viewed positively during that testing," the statement said. "Libra takes all feedback very seriously, and in response to this, we will immediately review our future position with this campaign based on the feedback received.

http://www.news.com.au/business/drag-queen-tampon-ad-transphobic-claim/story-e6frfm1i-1226235510283
Thank god we live in a free country.

... wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 7:59pm:

freediver wrote on May 9th, 2012 at 7:58pm: Are you suggesting that your employer should not be able to hold you accountable for idiotic things you put out on the company letterhead? You didnt read the story.  :'(

I had a look at the scan of the letter to the editor. It referenced his employer at the bottom. That is, he was using the credibility of his employer to bolster his position.


... wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 8:52pm:

Our good friends across the tasman are not beyond the grasp of the thought police either. Quote: TAMPON maker Libra has apologised after its new ad was branded "outrageously transphobic" and caused a storm of controversy on social media websites. In a statement issued tonight, Libra said it regrets any offence taken to the New Zealand television commercial, which implied transgender people are not real women because they don't menstruate. "It was never intended to upset or offend anyone. Independent research was undertaken and the advertisement was viewed positively during that testing," the statement said. "Libra takes all feedback very seriously, and in response to this, we will immediately review our future position with this campaign based on the feedback received. http://www.news.com.au/business/drag-queen-tampon-ad-transphobic-claim/story-e6frfm1i-1226235510283 Thank god we live in a free country.

Can you explain this? Was Libra legally forced to issue a retraction? Or did it voluntarily retract the ads? You appear to be confusing freedom of speech with freedom from ridicule and consequence yet again. You cannot force people to keep purchasing Libra despite being offended by the company's ad. That has nothing to do with denial of freedom of speech. In fact it is a demonstration of free speech in action.

I could sit here and post a million examples, it wouldn't make a difference. 

Of course it is not going to make a difference if you mistake examples of freedom of speech in action for the denial of freedom of speech.

Am I correct that you are merely confusing free speech with freedom from ridicule?

Quote:

Our good friends across the tasman are not beyond the grasp of the thought police either. [quote] TAMPON maker Libra has apologised after its new ad was branded "outrageously transphobic" and caused a storm of controversy on social media websites. .

Yes they have thought police tolerance in social media in NZ.
Real men push real facts about real men.

Supposedly you are free to say whatever you want to say in Australia. Well unless you say something about john howard that may still be illegal. Lying or racism or any number of things will prolly carry consequences though.

SOB