Why do some Germans think they have free speech?

[Juxtapose]

"German law enforcement authorities on Thursday carried out raids across Germany against people suspected of posting misogynistic hate speech on the internet as part of of a coordinated push to shine the spotlight on online violence against women."

https://apnews.com/article/germany-women-misogyny-raids-internet-hate-crime-31d3e61aab90bdce3f6f0d96e21d0fe4

Vs

https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/funeral-protests/

https://www.newsweek.com/armed-neo-nazis-marched-police-protection-during-detroit-pride-parade-1443013

Westboro Baptist Church and Neo-Nazis allowed to march and even protected by the government from people who are weak and get too offended.

🇺🇲

Updates

+1 y

https://i.ibb.co/J2trgCq/images-1.jpg

Updates

+1 y

From a user who answered here wonderfully (can't give credit or it'd be a member post):

"Respect can't be LEGISLATED and lack of respect CRIMINALIZED."

[Sargentcaptain]

> online violence

Ah yes, this brings up good old memories, stuff like 'virtual rape' ie, tea bagging.

Anyway, morons who agree with the government like it when people who don't agree with the them are being censored. First it's the cope of 'whe got fri spich, just not heyt spich', then comes good ol' 'iz not faschist when wii do it', then 'people like you should not be allowed to say that', and for the grand final 'people like you should not be allowed in our soyciety'. Most of these morons don't know nor care for how the laws are actually written or applied, they just like the appearance of a 'polite and civil society', which jails people for wrongthink.

They like to wrap their fascist shit in a neat little bow of 'it's just decency and respect'. Yet a good porting of them would cheer on the attacks on Charlie Hebdo. These are the types of ghouls who would be fine with the likes of Count Dankula rotting away in prison for his gross crime of telling a joke.

It's all so tiresome. Anyway, fuck Europe.

[Rangers]

This shouldn't be surprising, we all know what the German government did to people who spoke out against them in the 40s.

Even SS Officers would be punished with death, if they opened their mouths about what was going on in concentration camps

[DryGermanGuy]

Because we have free speech. You obviously have no experience with it, because you don’t speak our language, have never worked here, have never lived here. You try to fumble around with silly little online articles, that are without context and clickbait for fringe-„educated“ fools.
US-Americans are always proud with their theories, look our awesome constitution, the great amendments, bla. I am much more interested how the whole system works out, in the real world, for the average Joe: America is chock-full with silly laws and regulations that trip over average people and cost them time, money and their jobs. 2,5 million people in jail or prison, 2,5 million more under parole or probation. A police force with hunting quotas, feeding the arrest and justice system with new victims every day. It’s utter nonsense.
Do you have any idea how much freedom a German employee has, to speak out against his management, go on strike or simply get the health treatment he needs? In the USA you get fired for looking crosseyed at your manager or being ill. Again, no thanks.

[Juxtapose]

I have three friends I know in Germany and they tell me about how people are pulled out of their homes for what they post online and their own fears of posting things online. They are even afraid to speak to me candidly online for fear of it possibly happening to them. So no, you are wrong. Nice try with your assumption though!

If you don't do crimes you won't end up in prison unless you are dealing with a corrupt cop. That has nothing to do with free speech.

Again, irrelevant to freedom of speech. The right to fire at will is a totally different debate.

[Juxtapose]

I'm actually going to be visiting Hamburg this year. Can't wait to meet some German perverts with my friends.

[Juxtapose]

But I won't be able to post freely on social media while I stay there because your country is shit!

[DryGermanGuy]

I don’t believe a word of that queer nonsense you’re spouting. Germans being afraid of posting online… people pulled out of their homes… right! 🙄 🤦‍♂️

[NYCQuestions1976]

Such utter nonsense. No one gets fired for "being ill" in the United States, and "universal health care" outside of the United States is a farce for anything other basic routine medical maintenance. No one waits months to see "free" medical specialists (or pays out of pocket to cut the line) when it's necessary. I just had a serious medical issue that I dealt with successfully. My co-pay was only $100 on a nearly $36,000 bill, and I didn't need to wait months for anything. Also, 19 of the top 100 best medical facilities are in the United States, including 4 of the top 5, and 8 of the top 20:

www.newsweek.com/.../worlds-best-hospitals-2024

So stop believing ridiculous propaganda.

[Juxtapose]

Yeah you don't believe it because it's inconvenient for you that I actually know Germans who are telling me the truth while you are telling me lies.

Do you want me to introduce you to my friends when I go to Hamburg? I'm going there this August.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Really, you're saying nobody in America has ever got fired for not being able to turn up for work for a couple of weeks?

"nearly $36,000 bill" Did you get a full body transplant, or what?

Have a look for what you had done on here https://www.mymeditravel.com/ and tell us the approximate prices.

The American system encourages high bills, so that the capped insurance company profit margin produces more money.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded All I read was, "Wah wah wah socialism, wah wah wah."

News flash: Doctors (or just about all of them... exceptions exist, of course) have earned the right to make money in their profession, just as I've earned that right in my profession, and the same with just about everyone else. Probably not you though, which is likely the reason you don't mind shoveling your income to the government the same way you shovel bullshit on this site.

If a small company, or a specific department in a larger company, with 5 employees has someone not working "for a couple of weeks", what's that company supposed to do? Not hire a temporary (if the person is eventually coming back) replacement? Are those other 4 employees just expected to pick up the slack? Duh.

You're living in a fantasy conjured up and only existing between your ears.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Maybe you should learn to read, then.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded I know how to read, and read/translated your post correctly.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 You were claiming nobody in America has ever got fired for not being able to turn up for work for a couple of weeks. Why should I take you seriously?

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Yeah maybe YOU SPECIFICALLY can go weeks without showing up for work (here or there), but useful people with marketable skills are needed at their jobs.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 So as long as it doesn't affect you, it doesn't exist?

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded No, it's, "Just because it happens to you specifically, doesn't mean it happens to everyone (or anyone) else."

@goaded : "I need some time off from work."

@goaded 's employer: "Take all the time you want and need."

@goaded : "Are you sure?"

@goaded 's employer: "Definitely. In fact, leave now. Please."

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 So you're saying I would lose my job in the US if I got sick, in order to prove that people in the US don't lose their jobs if they get sick. Smooth.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded No, I'm stating quite bluntly that you specifically, healthy or sick, wouldn't survive in a meritocracy in any and all possible situations and scenarios.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Yeah, you're insulting me because you know you don't have a leg to stand on; people in America can lose their jobs for getting sick. (It's called ad hominem, by the way.)

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded It's not an unsubstantiated insult. After numerous interactions with you, I'm quite certain it's a provable fact.

No one here ever gets fired from their job for getting sick, unless they lied about preexisting conditions on their job application. Unlike in the Union Of European Socialist Republics, lying on a job application is a fireable offense in the United States, and rightfully so.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 There are many states where you can be fired without any reason.

Which of course you know, so you're simply throwing out lies and hoping they'll stick.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded As usual, you're full of crap. No one in the United States ever gets "fired without any reason".

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 "... at-will employment, a legal standard that allows companies to fire people for almost any reason—and sometimes for no reason at all. Unlike in other wealthy countries, where bosses generally have to provide just cause for termination, at-will positions account for most U. S. jobs. This probably includes your job, dear reader. Most white-collar and professional workers aren’t any more legally protected from their bosses’ whims..."
www.bloomberg.com/.../new-york-just-cause-law-is-about-to-make-workers-much-tougher-to-fire

If you can be fired for not smiling when there are no customers there you sure as hell can be fired for missing work because of illness.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Oh knock it off already and stop moving the goalposts. Is merit/lack of merit the point? Or is sick leave the point? Regardless, no one in the United States ever gets fired without merit, and no one ever gets fired on medical leave. Working a cash register at a fast food joint isn't meant to be a career for an adult. Also, maybe next time you can find a link that isn't multiple years old.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 I'm not moving any goalposts, you're hoping no-one remembers you saying "No one gets fired for "being ill" in the United States".

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded There's nothing to forget. No one gets fired from their job for getting sick in the United States. I already laid out the actual situations that get people fired.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 So, to be clear, most working Americans can be fired for literally no reason at all, but you say none of them are ever fired for getting sick. Got it.

[Juxtapose]

Actually with at will employment you don't have to give a reason. It could be for some reason that's technically illegal like them being black but you don't have to disclose that. You can make up some other bullshit.

[goaded]

@Juxtapose Exactly, and firing someone for missing work, even if it's for sickness or injury, is legal, so "No one gets fired for "being ill" in the United States" is simply false.

[Juxtapose]

@goaded people have sick days they are entitled to use but you can just fire them anyway and make something up 🤷

[Juxtapose]

I have seen a court case though where a friend of my mom's won and got a lot of money because she proved there was sexist discrimination against her. So tread lightly business people.

[goaded]

@Juxtapose That's something, I guess she wasn't on minimum wage. Most US states don't have any sick leave laws, if you count the ones that say localities can't enact their own laws. en.wikipedia.org/.../Sick_leave_in_the_United_States

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded You're still moving the goalposts and changing the target. As @Juxtapose pointed out in his example, it's illegal to fire someone for discrimination. No one in the United States is ever fired "for being sick" or "for no reason", and there are already laws in place against illegal firings.

The fact that you continue to argue this point just further emphasizes that you've spent your lifetime incapable of obtaining anything by merit, and that you believe that unskilled and unproductive people are entitled to careers. Stupid socialism at its finest.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Where did I move the goalposts from, if we weren't talking about your assertion "No one gets fired for "being ill" in the United States"? I've shown that employers don't need a reason to fire most US employees, you haven't shown anything that says different for anything but discrimination.

Discrimination laws don't cover people missing work because of illness, do they?

Nice bit of ad hominem at the end there. Total bullshit, though.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Employees who develop illnesses while employed are protected under the same anti-discrimination laws, providing they didn't lie prior to their employment. So your entire ridiculous argument is wrong and anti-merit, Dipshit.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 And you'd like me to believe that covers every employee, even those in smaller companies, independent contractors, etc. Remember, I never claimed all Americans can be fired for being sick, you claimed none could.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Yes, because in the rare instances that it might happen, there are laws in place to insure that companies are raked over the coals, and rightfully so. Meanwhile, in the Union Of European Socialist Republics, laziness, entitlement, and incompetence is protected and rewarded over effort, merit, and skill. @goaded = Exhibit A.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Not if you haven't worked there long enough, earned enough money, or there are fewer than a certain number of employees within 75 miles. YES, there are laws that protect some, maybe even most people, but SOME people aren't protected, so SOME people get fired for getting sick. Not "none", as you claimed.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Haven't worked there long enough? So now you're changing it to complaining about employers having trial periods for new hires? Employers should be stuck with new employees who prove they aren't capable of performing their jobs? Get the hell out of here.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 No, I've not changed anything. Are you still really insisting that nobody in the US gets fired for getting sick, despite all the evidence?

"Employees are eligible to take FMLA leave if they have worked for their employer for at least 12 months, and have worked for at least 1,250 hours over the previous 12 months, and work at a location where at least 50 employees are employed by the employer within 75 miles."

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded You do realize that the FMLA (Family Medical Leave Act) is completely different from personal sick leave/time, correct? Never mind, I briefly forgot that I'm arguing with Mr. Marx Obtuse.

So you're pointing out that new employees have to work a certain amount of time before they earn privileges, because work is a meritocracy? To hell you say!

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 OK, then show me a law that covers all Americans that prevents them from being fired for being ill. That's your bogus claim.

What you're really saying is that as long as it doesn't happen to you, you don't care.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded No, I don't care because it doesn't happen. So far, your examples (fast food cashier, trial period employees) are your ridiculous attempts at grasping for straws. You're arguing for instant entitlement over merit, which is stupid.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 No "grasping at straws", they're Americans who aren't protected against being fired for being ill, I'm sure there are many other groups, but unlike you I only have to show one counter-example.

I'm not making any argument about anything other than what you erroneously claimed, that "No one gets fired for "being ill" in the United States". Still bullshit.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded No, because as I pointed out, it doesn't happen. Your examples of fast food cashiers and new unproven employees are completely nonsensical. Anyone with proper reasoning and common sense understands that. You're just a socialist that values instant entitlement over earned merit, which automatically makes you wrong.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 You keep saying I'm saying things I'm not. Even so, "fast food cashiers and new unproven employees" are Americans, too, and they can be fired for getting sick (along with many other groups), which you claim they can't.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded I'm claiming that, and will continue to claim that, because it doesn't happen. Your examples and reasoning are dumb, because you're arguing for instant entitlement over earned merit in the workplace, which is completely absurd. Thus you're automatically wrong.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 So, of the millions of people who aren't protected by law, none of them are ever fired for being sick? Bullshit. There are many law advice pages online that explain who isn't allowed to be fired for being sick precisely because it can and does happen. I'm not making the argument you're pretending I am, and by saying that you're proving my point that many Americans aren't protected from being fired for being sick.

e. g. www.employmentlawhelp.org/blog/fired-being-sick

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Anyone in the United States can sue anyone or anything at any time for anything. A site meant to generate money for government lawyers and instant entitlement mooches proves only that point, and nothing else.

People with jobs and careers in the United States don't get fired for being sick.

[Juxtapose]

@NYCQuestions1976 yeah I have never seen that happen myself. My last roommate had very severe issues and I would have to frequently pick her up after she would collapse to the floor while working. Her work was pretty understanding and it's just freaking Walmart.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 You've literally been saying that only people outside a certain group can be fired for being ill, so nobody is fired for being ill.

There are laws that protect some, maybe even most, employees, but there are exceptions, and those are the people who can, and no doubt are, fired for being ill.

[goaded]

"yeah I have never seen that happen myself". Typical. "It's never affected me, so it doesn't happen."

Walmart has too many employees to be exempt from the law protecting employees.

[Juxtapose]

@goaded I've been all over the country and talk to lots of people. I know what is common and what happens in America way better than you do.

[goaded]

@Juxtapose So now it has to be common to happen at all? The claim is that nobody is fired for being ill.

How many people do you know who've gone bankrupt from medical expenses? None? Does that mean that never happens, either?

[Juxtapose]

@goaded I didn't say it NEVER happens.

[Juxtapose]

America is almost as big as Europe while your country is not even as big as Texas. Have a little perspective.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@Juxtapose I was the one who stated it never happens, because it doesn't happen. Then the ridiculous examples in the links @goaded supplied were fast food cashiers (not meant to be a career) and new hire trial employees. He seems to believe that the exact moment that someone is hired, they should immediately be allowed to miss weeks and months of work on the company's dime. It's an utterly nonsensical example of instant unearned entitlement.

[goaded]

"I didn't say it NEVER happens."
No, but @NYCQuestions1976 did and still is, while simultaneously listing the people it happens to.

"America is almost as big as Europe while your country is not even as big as Texas. Have a little perspective."
So? I don't think there's a single country in the EU that allows people to be fired for getting sick, and I think they all have laws ensuring paid sick leave, where the US doesn't even require unpaid sick leave. The UK has twice the population of Texas, and Germany's got twice the population of California.

worldpopulationreview.com/.../countries-with-paid-sick-leave

[Juxtapose]

@goaded by USA law you are not allowed to fire people for being sick. What about that is not getting through your head?

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Your argument basically boils down to something like this analogy: Claiming that people under 18 or 21 should immediately have the same privileges as people over 18 or 21, and that's completely ridiculous and nonsensical.

[DryGermanGuy]

In an American at-will state the management does not have to give any explanation at all for kicking people out, so OF COURSE people are fired for being sick, they just rename it as "adjusting the team size", "not meeting performance expectations" or "not having enough tasks". Obviously you are the one not getting it in your head.
Here in this very forum you can read many questions along the line of, "After taking a few days off, I still feel sick, will I get fired, if I take more sick days?" etc etc etc.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@DryGermanGuy You can also see other absurd questions on GaG like "Is My 12" Penis Too Big For Her Tiny Vagina?" So asking a question about something doesn't automatically mean that it's happening. Also, how about context? I guarantee that the people asking those dumb questions aren't beyond trial employees. Bottom line: Stop advocating for unearned privileges and unearned entitlement. There are laws in place in the United States that prevent people from being fired for being sick. It doesn't happen, and when companies try to do it, they're raked over the coals, and rightfully so.

[goaded]

@Juxtapose Name the law that "by USA law you are not allowed to fire people for being sick.". The only laws I've come across have exceptions, such as small companies, too short employment, not enough employees within 75 mile radius, etc.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 No, my argument is that there are people in the US who can be fired for getting sick, which was the original claim that you absolutely denied before then listed the exceptions while still claiming it doesn't happen to anyone.

Your only defence is to claim I'm saying things I'm obviously not.

[Juxtapose]

@goaded wrong.

"While employers generally cannot terminate an employee solely for being sick, there may be situations where termination is legally permissible if it is based on factors unrelated to the employee’s illness."

mrjustice.com/.../

[goaded]

So, you're saying they can. From your own link: "how many sick days is too many? It depends on the job description, the company, and the paid sick leave policy each company offers its employees."

Also, pay attention to the wording here: "can you sue a company for firing you for being sick? It is usually illegal for a California employer to terminate a worker’s employment if they use sick leave they have accrued, and are entitled to use. If a worker is fired for using sick leave, they might be able to file a lawsuit for wrongful termination."

It's saying that a worker can be fired if they've used up all their sick days, just not if they've only taken what they've been entitled to.

[Juxtapose]

@goaded well yeah, if you go beyond your sick days you fucked up. That's on you man.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded No, my argument is that your examples and/or exceptions are so egregiously dumb that they don't count.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@Juxtapose If you're a legitimate employee and you use up your sick leave, you can use FMLA time, and/or use Workman's Compensation.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 FFS. "You can't be fired for being sick except in these dozens of exceptions covering millions of Americans, so that means it never happens" (paraphrasing).

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Millions of people all over the United States aren't getting fired for being sick. Stop being obnoxious and melodramatic. Maybe you should make yourself some toast. (Hint: It's not toast prior to being put in the toaster.)

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 I said the exceptions cover millions of Americans, not that they're all getting fired for being sick, just that they can be and many will be.

You won't get toast out of a toaster if what you're putting in is a banana. (This is a reference to whether a House Resolution, as opposed to a House Bill/Act, can become a law, it can't.)

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded "... just that they can be and many will be." So now you're Kreskin?

You're putting bananas in places they don't belong? Keep your weird fantasies to yourself.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 If something's legal, even if it's really immoral, it's going to be happening if it affects someone's bottom line.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded That could be the same argument against abortion.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Talk about moving the goalposts.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded My point was that your last post was vague generalization.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Not in context. In context, you've admitted that there are large groups of people who aren't protected from being fired for getting sick (not to mention your "if you go beyond your sick days you fucked up"), and yet you're still claiming it never happens, despite the fact that, as I said, "If something's legal, even if it's really immoral, it's going to be happening if it affects someone's bottom line".

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded There aren't "large groups of people". It doesn't happen. It's illegal. When companies try to break the law, they're raked over the coals.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 OMG, there are EXCEPTIONS to those laws, you've named some yourself. Firing those people for getting sick is not against the law, that's the whole point!

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded No, the whole point is that you're arguing for instant entitlement over earned merit.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 No, the whole point is that you're insisting that if not everybody can be fired for being sick, nobody can be fired for being sick. And that's ridiculous and wrong.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded No one gets fired for being sick in the United States. It doesn't happen because it's illegal. Your examples are nonsensical.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Quick reminder: "No one gets fired for being sick in the United States. It doesn't happen because it's illegal. Your examples are nonsensical." was a response to: "you're insisting that if not everybody can be fired for being sick, nobody can be fired for being sick. And that's ridiculous and wrong."

Even @Juxtapose says you're full of shit.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded I just read through the thread, and nowhere did @Juxtapose claim I was "full of shit'. In fact, as he pointed out in his example days ago, it's illegal to fire someone for discrimination. No one in the United States is ever fired "for being sick" or "for no reason", and there are already laws in place against illegal firings. Also, if you're an actual employee and run out of sick time, there's FMLA and Workman's Compensation to utilize.

The fact that you continue to argue this point just further emphasizes that you've spent your entire lifetime incapable of obtaining anything by merit, and that you believe that unskilled and unproductive people are instantly entitled to unearned privileges and careers simply because they exist. Your examples continue to be ridiculous and nonsensical, and are nothing more than stupid socialism at its finest.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 He said: "@goaded I didn't say it NEVER happens.", because to say so is obviously ridiculous.

Your response: "I was the one who stated it never happens, because it doesn't happen."

Then you go on to suggest that what never happens only happens to "unskilled and unproductive people", which proves my point while simultaneously being a lie since people who simply haven't worked a year at the company, for example, are also not protected by law, no matter how skilled or productive they are.

Then you mix in a bit of ad hominem, making unfounded assertions about me.

It's all a bit sad, really.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Then I believe @Juxtapose followed that up with the word you're most familiar with for your entire life:

Wrong!

No one gets fired for being sick in the United States.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Keep reading to see some of the situations where you can be fired for being ill. Like if you've used up all your company-allocated sick days.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded There's FMLA and Workman's Compensation after that.

Remember: Toast doesn't go in the toaster.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 If you're eligible. Some people are not. Some jobs don't have any paid or even unpaid sick leave. Therefore some people are fired for getting sick.

e. g. "Texas law doesn’t require private-sector employers to grant paid or unpaid sick leave to their employees."

And guess what happens when "three cities have attempted to establish it for private-sector employees:

Dallas
San Antonio
Austin

These attempts were met with a pushback from the government—Austin was prohibited from enforcing its sick paid leave regulations in June 2020 by the Texas Supreme Court."
https://donotpay.com/learn/texas-paid-sick-leave/

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded
https://youtu.be/cSB9H9Tk5dQ?si=KR8Imaz5sXoO5McI

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 I have no idea why you're talking about toast. You brought it up while pretending a resolution to stongly condemn something was the same as proposing a law to make it illegal. It's not.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded It was my response to another one of your stale and stupid examples. The FMLA and Workman's Compensation are federal laws/mandates. Nobody gets fired for being sick in the United States. You just want everyone to genuflect to obnoxious government overlords. Go peddle your stupid far-left anti-American socialism propaganda bullshit somewhere else.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Is everybody covered by FMLA and Workman's Compensation? No. So stop lying.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded You mean employees like this?

"Hi I'm @goaded. I know I've only been working here for 2 hours, but I need at least a year off of fully paid sick leave because I got a boo-boo on my finger toasting a banana in my toaster."

Go F yourself.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Ah, ad hominem, again. Just admit you're wrong and shut up.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded No, because I'm not wrong, and you're not to ever be taken seriously under any circumstances.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 OK, forget it, just shut up.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded No, because I and everyone else with logic and common sense on their side should never placate socialists and their deliberately dangerous ideas. You and every other stupid anti-freedom anti-American socialist needs to be challenged, belittled, and publicly humiliated as frequently as possible. They need to be reminded about their ignorance as often as possible. If you want a safe space echo chamber for your nonsensical and ridiculous propaganda, go cry about it somewhere else.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 No. Logic and common sense, not to mention dozens of law advice web pages say that some people in America are fired for getting sick.

Here's yet another one:
"you CAN get fired for calling in sick if it rubs your boss the wrong way and they feel like firing you"

www.businessmanagementdaily.com/.../

Only one state, Montana, isn't an at-will state. Only 14 states require paid sick leave.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Why would states need laws to cover things already covered by federal laws? No one gets fired for being sick in the United States. You just like redundant laws because you're a socialist who loves useless and pointless regulations and big fat stupid bloated grim reaper socialism bullshit government.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 As usual, you're completely wrong. Same link: "Before we get started, it’s crucial to note that no federal laws require employers to provide employees with sick leave."

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded You should try finding *recent* links. You won't though, for obvious reasons.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Nice try, that link is 18 months old, from December 2022. Although it wouldn't surprise me if the Biden administration passed another federal law to protect the working class since then. You could provide a more recent link that explicitly says no-one can be fired for getting sick in the US, if there was one.

www.businessmanagementdaily.com/.../

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded The only things Biden passes are gas and the occasional underwear chocolate bar, and the only employee that he should be worried about is himself. He's getting fired in November.

You really do like your stale socialism opinion links. Nobody gets fired for being sick in the United States. Give it up already. Your twisted socialism "brain" makes you delusional.

It's now officially a phenomenal holiday weekend here (Memorial Day weekend). I'll waste more of my valuable time on you again on Tuesday. Well maybe Monday. The weather on Monday may shorten the outdoor activities this weekend.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Yes, Business Management Daily has all the hallmarks of a socialist outlet. Idiot. You tried calling it old (18 months), now you're calling it "socialist" because that's the last refuge of the right when they know they're wrong. Correction, it's the first refuge.

www.businessmanagementdaily.com/.../
"no federal laws require employers to provide employees with sick leave."

You want us to believe that no employer would ever take advantage of that to fire someone for being ill.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded I know you need a week off from work every time you blow your nose because you're a wimpy pansy, but it doesn't mean that people are ever getting fired for being sick in the United States. It just doesn't happen. We've got the FMLA and Workman's Compensation.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 You can keep telling the same lies, but we both know that they are.

You keep mentioning the FMLA; that's a Democratic law signed by Clinton. If Republicans had their way it would never have happened. As it is, it doesn't cover everyone. As you know but won't admit.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Nobody gets fired for being sick in the United States. If you believe a week of sick days isn't enough for one employee over a calendar year, then go wah about it somewhere else. Not everyone is as sickly and useless as you, nor are they begging for government overlords to run their lives like you.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 "Nobody gets fired for being sick in the United States" except the people who don't count, right? Those people who haven't qualified for the Democratic policies to protect them. You talk about them all the time as if they're not Americans who can get fired for being sick.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Only you don't count, so only you would get fired.

[andreasderjuengere]

Because we were raised with ''freedom'' to think whatever ''we'' want. :D

(during the last half century, that is)

It's true -in fact- that words such as ''Neger'', or ''Zigeuner'' are labelled to be unwanted.

The wokeness idiocracy has swapped over the Atlantic since a while already.

But ''we'' did not start this bullshit :)

Then: just babbling out any garbage that's in ''our'' minds is not considered to be ''free speech'' in the eyes of a culture that looks back on several centuries of OWN development :D

We must be aware that ''America'' and the various countries in Europe are NOT of the same culture meanwhile. So it will be understandable that on both sides there is some confusion about the (significant) differences.

[Juxtapose]

Would you rather have American style speech laws or German style speech laws personally?

[andreasderjuengere]

That's not easy to say. In my life I only spent three weeks in the U. S. - whatever I wanted to say was possible. But I will not know ALL details. 20 years ago I left my country of birth for good - and what I see developping from afar is not much of my liking. It's still better than in my hosting country where you - as one example- can get to prison for years if you criticize the King...
My own understanding of ''freedom of Speech'' is that one is not hindered to openly declare, discuss or explain one's ideas or positions. In a respectful and reasonably peaceful way of course.
Generally... ''speeching'' without laws interfering could be simple common sense - if only we all would want that :)

[Juxtapose]

In America you can be as disrespectful as you want as long as you don't follow someone around and harass them. You can go up to me and public and say the most heinous thing, walk away and there's nothing I am legally allowed to do about it.

[andreasderjuengere]

And does such a ''freedom'' help a n y o n e? :)
I'd rather expect this kind of behaviour from primitive cultures, heh heh.

[Juxtapose]

Yes it does because we are not ruled by fascist scum or a stupid ass Nanny state.

[Juxtapose]

And if you control speech you control thought. Fuck that.

[andreasderjuengere]

I thought about self imposed speech control :)

[Juxtapose]

Advocate for social rules all you want. I won't lift a finger to stop you until you try to legislate it.

[andreasderjuengere]

Cool. Actually, all ''freedoms'' must also count for those who do NOT share my (or someone's) opinion/s. And... I'm really the LAST person on this silly planet who would request MORE rules (or laws).

[Anonymous]

From what I hear much of Europe has limited freedom of speech much to the detriment of their entire civilization as few if anyone is able to point out the huge problems now threatening the continued existence of their civilization.

Never before in history as a population been soo quickly and completely destroyed. At least plagues have the good since to burn themselfs out.

It seems for indispensable decades almost nobody in Europe was even free to discuss the issue.

All while Europe's genocidal elite living in their walled off communities commanded what was and was not ok for everyone else to think and say.

It is possible no population has ever suffered soo much demographically as Europe has in the past few decades thanks in no small part to their tolerance of censorship of their self-loathing & frankly genocidal academic and political elite.

[goaded]

Exactly how is it to the "detriment of their entire civilization" to say that deliberate lies about people are unacceptable? You have slander and libel laws, but hardly anyone can afford to use them.

You really think that it would be OK if I said "Monoprise has 15 children locked up in his basement as sex slaves at this address..."?

Only the nutcase with an AR-15 who came to shoot you would be guilty of a crime, not me? How is that reasonable?

[Juxtapose]

@goaded under USA law you would be prosecuted.

[Opinion Owner]

@goaded Some states have Libel and Slander laws, some are not even constitutional under the State's constitution.
Other's like Connecticut which preport to apply across state lines are downright unconstitutional assault upon the right of every other American and their state.

So yes few use them because the situation for using them is controversial and not soo common.

If you told the police that you could be prostituted for false allocation, particularity if you did it repeatedly and thus intentionally to abuse said police. But I'm not sure why anyone would believe that.

The nutcase that came to shoot me would have no trouble seeing there is noone children or otherwise locked up anywhere on my property. If they were nutty enough to act upon your word then perhaps they might also deserve to be prostituted for trespassing.

If however they simply asked to check peacefully I would be inclined to let them.

[goaded]

"under USA law you would be prosecuted" Really? Did I miss the prosecutions of the pushers of Pizzagate?

[goaded]

@monorprise Really? You'd let an armed stranger look around your house? How about when they demanded to see the basement you don't have?

"The nutcase that came to shoot me would have no trouble seeing there is noone children or otherwise locked up anywhere on my property. If they were nutty enough to act upon your word then perhaps they might also deserve to be prostituted for trespassing.

If however they simply asked to check peacefully I would be inclined to let them."

[goaded]

Funny how so many "free speech" champions block me to avoid anyone hearing my "more speech" that disputes what they say. (Not you, admittedly, but I think the number of people blocking me on here might be in triple digits by now.)

While we're at it, from your link: "None of the suspects were detained", and I noticed you said in another, related, question "Even if you are right about that woman's intentions that should not land her in prison.", when she'd been fined.

[goaded]

Oh, and Eminem, during a previous pandemic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtSv4XF9uYI

[Juxtapose]

The only people I have blocked besides those who have blocked me is trolls or this one guy that absolutely refused to engage in good faith but was everywhere. I couldn't stand him dude, absolute dumbest guy ever. I can't name him due to the website's rules but yeah.. you'll NEVER be that stupid so nothing for you to worry about! You and I can disagree until the cows come home but at least you can engage me honestly. So no blocking for you!

The fact that this even has to be brought up at all and that this was entertained at all is a huge problem. These people had their homes raided over things they said online..

[Juxtapose]

And by the way what happens if people refuse to pay a bullshit fine?

They go to prison. That woman was extorted by the state with a threat of kidnapping, something that is very severe, just because she offended people. Absolutely preposterous.

[goaded]

In Germany “Respect for people and their reputation enjoys legal protection, and shouldn’t be verbally violated.”

It's nothing to do with someone being offended by something someone else says, it only covers damaging lies. It's like slander or libel, but doesn't cost the complainant years of time and huge amounts of money.

Breaking that law got her a fine. Breaking the law that says she has to pay fines might get a prison sentence, but so might not paying speeding tickets. That doesn't mean they've been jailed for the original crime.

www.latimes.com/.../...-insult-law-snap-story.html

[Juxtapose]

You can literally go to prison by refusing to pay a fine you got by flipping off a cop in Germany.

[goaded]

Yes, because both things are illegal. The latter gets a fine, the former gets prison. Tell me what happens to people who don't pay their fines in America.

American police kill 1000 people every year, compared to 10 in Germany. What happened to all those people's freedom?

[Juxtapose]

This is specifically about freedom of speech. We can compare and contrast other parts of countries but I am focused on free speech because that is a very fundamental right.

If I flip a cop off in Germany, they can arrest me. They cannot in America. Big difference.

[goaded]

Yes. And you'll get arrested in both countries for telling a mob to "kill him!".

Why would you want to flip off a cop, anyway? Aren't you supposed to respect authority in order to avoid being treated like a black man (and maybe being shot)?

[Juxtapose]

Not equivalent at all. That's incitement.

I don't need a reason, I just need the freedom. If I don't have the freedom then it means I need to do it relentlessly.

[goaded]

It's still a restriction on freedom of speech. Germany simply has one more restriction.

[Juxtapose]

One restriction is on physical violence while another one is based on hurt feelings. Big difference.

[goaded]

Keep telling yourself that. Why do you think ideas and lies are the same thing? Nobody is stopping anyone from saying that sexual assault crimes are committed by certain immigrants in Germany out of proportion to their relative population because that's true.

What is absolutely not true is that makes everyone in those groups a danger, which is what was being claimed. You wouldn't accept that 99% of rapes are committed by men, so men should be considered dangerous and got rid of, would you?

[Juxtapose]

Yeah your characterization of what she said is probably wrong. I doubt she actually meant that all Muslims or whatever are bad and they should all be gotten rid of. Definitely an overreaction and an over-exaggeration of what the lady was likely saying.

[Juxtapose]

And just so you know men are already considered dangerous and while they're not gotten rid of, they are avoided.

[goaded]

She's an AfD politician.

"Back in November, high-ranking politicians from Germany’s far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party, neo-Nazis, and sympathetic businesspeople gathered in a hotel near Potsdam. Their agenda? Nothing less than the fine tuning of a plan for the forced deportations of millions of people currently living in Germany."
correctiv.org/.../

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Here. Learn:
https://youtu.be/Kj2tp8eOJHE?si=ycqlUky7ybYl0kk8

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Try coming up with a reputable source.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 From the description: "... in the U. S., the House of Representatives voted for a bill that would make chants like “from the river to the sea” illegal at universities." I ask you: is that true?

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded John Stossel is far more reputable and credible than you and every other anti-freedom socialist jackass.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Is it true that "in the U. S., the House of Representatives voted for a bill that would make chants like “from the river to the sea” illegal at universities."? Your "reputable and credible" Stossel says so.

1. Name the bill.
2. Show what crime it establishes.
3. Show the House voted for (passed) it, not just "on" it.

You can ask your "reputable and credible" source, if you like.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded There's a difference between an "approved bill" from one side of Congress and a "law" (passing the House, passing the Senate, signed by the President). Even if it somehow became a law, it'd be struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, and probably 9-0. I vehemently appose that anti-Israel, anti-Jewish chant, but stupid people are allowed to chant stupid things.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Oh, look, you're ignoring the question again. Your "reputable and credible" Stossel lied.

There is NO bill that has been proposed, let alone voted on, let alone passed by the House that "that would make chants like “from the river to the sea” illegal at universities.", as he claims. He's a liar and a propagandist.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Liar and propagandist? You're looking in the mirror while posting again.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976

Name the bill he's talking about.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Here, Clown. Next time, do your own damn homework. I've got better things to do with my valuable time:

gottheimer.house.gov/.../release-house-passes-gottheimer-led-bipartisan-resolution-condemning-antisemitic-from-the-river-to-the-sea-chants

Also, you just hate Stossel because he shits all over your precious stupid socialism.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 I don't hate Stossel, I just recognise a propagandist when I see one.

Yes, I thought he might have meant H. Res. 833, I already looked it up. Do you understand the difference between a Bill and a Resolution? That resolution has no teeth, and simply says the chant should be "strongly condemned".

No new crime, not made illegal. He was lying, see?

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded You're either backpedaling or grasping at straws via semantics. Either way, the result is the same. You're wrong.

Stossel has won multiple journalistic awards over the last half century. You hate him because he accurately, correctly, and rightfully shits all over socialists and socialism.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Oh and it's referred to as a BILL at least twice on this government site, AND in the link itself:

www.congress.gov/.../883

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 It's funny how you keep accusing me of not understanding the US system of govenment, when you don't understand the difference between a resolution and a proposed law. H. R. 833 is a proposed law, H. Res. 833 is a resolution.

H. R. 833: "Save America's Rural Hospitals Act

This bill establishes and otherwise modifies payment requirements for rural health care providers under Medicare and Medicaid..."
www.congress.gov/.../all-info

H. Res. 833 "This resolution calls on campus administrators to do the following..."
www.congress.gov/.../all-info

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Check your own links. You're either obtuse or clueless. The "hospital" HR 833 is from the previous congressional/fiscal/calendar year. Duh.

Again, the government's own site and link call this year's HR 833 a BILL:

www.congress.gov/.../883

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 They're both the 118th congress (which is when the numbering starts from), and you're completely wrong and unable to admit it.

Stossel lied to you when he claimed "in the U. S., the House of Representatives voted for a bill that would make chants like “from the river to the sea” illegal at universities".

House Bill: www.congress.gov/.../all-info
House Resolution: www.congress.gov/.../all-info

Remember this next time you claim I don't understand how the US government works.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded You don't

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded You don't understand how the government works in the United States. After every New Year's Day, the new Congress convenes. One HR 833 is from 2023, and the other HR 833 is from 2024. The vote just happened in April. It's hilarious how you believe that the acronym HR means one thing on one bill, and something else on the other bill. So to recap, everything is the same. The government calls it a bill a number of times:

www.congress.gov/.../883

You hate Stossel because he shits on stupid socialism, and you're wrong about everything, as usual.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 LMAO. Dude, stop digging, it's embarrassing! There's a massive difference between "H. R." and "H. Res.". Maybe you should learn it. Both are numbered starting at 1 for each new (two year) congress.

H. Res.1 - Electing officers of the House of Representatives www.congress.gov/.../all-info
H. R.1 - Lower Energy Costs Act www.congress.gov/.../all-info

Stossel lied to you when he said "... in the U. S., the House of Representatives voted for a bill that would make chants like “from the river to the sea” illegal at universities.". Face it.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded The government calls is a bill. Numerous times. On their site, and in the link itself:

www.congress.gov/.../883

Thus it's a bill. If you don't like it, file a grievance and take it up with them. I'm sure they'll get back to you forthwith.

Stossel has won numerous journalistic awards over the last half century. You don't like him because he shits on socialists and socialism.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Give it up, and just admit that "H. Res." anything, a "Resolution", will never become a law. Proposed laws are labelled "H. R.", and named as an "Act", meaning a proposed law (or change to a law). He lied when he said "in the U. S., the House of Representatives voted for a bill that would make chants like “from the river to the sea” illegal at universities".

[goaded]

Do you not see the big red box that says "RESOLUTION" in www.congress.gov/.../all-info and the one that says "BILL" in www.congress.gov/.../all-info ?

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Did you read all of the multiple places on the Congressional page where they refer to HR 883 as a bill, including in the link title itself?

www.congress.gov/.../883

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 BIG RED BLOCK says "RESOLUTION", not "BILL", it's not anything to do with a LAW. You know you're full of shit, but you'll never stop. Admitting error is beyond your capabilities.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Oh good job, Patrick Star! You recognized size (BIG), and color (RED), and almost recognized shape (RECTANGLE, not BLOCK, 'cause block is three-dimensional). Now let's try counting. That's done with NUMBERS:

https://youtu.be/HpeB9Kkvb2Y?si=dLx1yX4W4_q9393k

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded How many times does BILL appear on this government site and in the link itself? I'll even post the link twice (that means 2 times) with an extra space in one of them to unlink the link so you can see it more clearly:

www.congress.gov/.../ 883

www.congress.gov/.../883

It's not a law because the House, despite voting on it and approving it (step 1), hasn't sent it over to the Senate for them to vote on it yet (step 2):

https://youtu.be/SZ8psP4S6BQ?si=3pCIPZ6oJ3LjkKxL

Now, you be sure to get back to me once you've made yourself less stupid. I'm sure I'll be waiting for a long time.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded I'll post that again:

https ://www. congress. gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/883

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 Oh, FFS. It's never going to get sent to the Senate because it's not a proposed law, it's a resolution. See where it says "house-resolution" in the URL? Bills have "house-bill" there, nd they have the word Act in the title.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded If it never gets sent to the Senate, then it remains in limbo as a bill (and another example of a waste of government time and taxpayer dollars), just as it says a number of times on the government's own site and in the link itself:

www.congress.gov/.../883

Did you count the number of times it's referred to as a bill on the government's own site, and in the link itself? If so:

https://youtu.be/bncke76z4cw?si=L91MjkEDu6Gye8vW

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 It will never get sent to the Senate because it was never intended to be. It's NOT A PROPOSED LAW! It's a House Resolution, not a House Bill.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded As I already told you, go file a grievance with the government. The Congressional page refers to 883 as a bill a number of times, including in the link itself. Thus 883 is a bill.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 My God, this is sad. You can't admit that a House Resolution (as opposed to a House Bill) will never be law because it's not intended to become a law.

That, and you'd prefer to believe the guy who's lied to you that "the House of Representatives voted for a bill that would make chants like “from the river to the sea” illegal at universities." over the documented reality that they haven't voted on any such law.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Congress doesn't vote on laws. They vote on bills that may or may not eventually become laws. That's like saying you put toast in a toaster. Well, maybe that's what YOU do. It would explain a whole hell of a lot.

Stossel called 883 a bill, because the House via the Congressional website called it a bill numerous times. You're grasping at straws because you hate Stossel for shitting all over socialists and socialism.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 OMG. A House Resolution, H. Res. whatever, is never going to be a law, it's not intended to be a law, it doesn't modify a law, and it doesn't create a new law. That requires a House Bill H. R. whatever, which is NOT THE SAME THING!

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded File your grievance with the government. The Congressional site refers to 883 as a bill numerous times. In the link itself as well.

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 You're just going to keep pretending you aren't embarrassing yourself by claiming that a Resolution is the same as an Act, a proposed law, just because they're also both referred to as bills, aren't you? Learn how your government works.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded That's pretty ironic, considering your government analogy was akin to putting toast in a toaster.

[IslaTheWitch]

lmao

all registered marches are protected. It's how it works here. The same is with protests under Brandenburger Tor (Brandenburg's Gate).

misogynistic hate speech is a law violation here. Everyone has the right to say their opinion, but respect to others is required, or there are consequences to offenders... It's simple like that. Just watch your language and you are safe.

[Juxtapose]

That isn't free speech. If I said something rude to you that invoked some kind of sexist stereotype, you should tell me off and then we go our separate ways. I should not end up locked in some cage because I offended you. That's absolutely preposterous.

[Juxtapose]

My rights do not end where you're offended. At least not the USA.

[IslaTheWitch]

@Juxtapose If you can't express your thoughts respectfully, it's your problem, not mine. Language is flexible, and if you want, you can express everything in a respectful way.

[IslaTheWitch]

everywhere, my freedom ends, where your freedom starts... it's kind of standard everywhere... and in the USA, people win court cases against oral offenders... so...

[Juxtapose]

See that's not free speech. I don't know why you laughed in your initial reply when I am clearly showing you your country does not have free speech.

[IslaTheWitch]

@Juxtapose I live here and openly express my opinion on different forums and in person. I've never been convicted. Sometimes, some people think they are over the law, but fortunately, in the EU, it's doomed to fail :D law is law. You can say whatever you want and express any opinion you want, as long as you don't offend anyone. Period. And you know, people here appreciate it. It makes all online arguing much more civilized. The same about TV debates, especially before elections... And people comply, not because they have to but because it's convenient. It's nice to feel safe in public space or online space.

[Juxtapose]

There is nothing unsafe about being offended. You are doing a disservice to your intellectual growth by promoting censorship. And even this civil conversation we are having right now will deeply offend some people even though we are not using any forbidden words or whatnot.

I find this quote by George Carlin to be quite accurate:

[IslaTheWitch]

@Juxtapose of course it's unsafe. Ask people neurodivergent, kids, minorities. We should consider everyone when we open our mouths or let our fingers touch the keyboard

respectful language is something everyone should learn at home by observing their parents or guardians... saying that considering other people is fascism... lol... we all live here, and without respect for each other, we won't survive...

[Juxtapose]

I am autistic myself and part of growing up was learning to have thick skin. I have endured every insult under the sun and have been made to feel as low as an ant. I have risen from these trials as a functional adult that will not let other people control how I feel. I don't care if you insult me, go right ahead. Why should I care? You don't know me.

It's one thing to have a social expectation, it's another thing to legislate it. George Carlin was right, it's fascism. You don't have a right to not be offended in the USA.

[Juxtapose]

And I guess I should also mention I have attention deficit disorder and dyslexia. I am also bisexual. I know it is like to be the outsider and to be very alone.

[Juxtapose]

*what it is like

[IslaTheWitch]

You say only "I...", "I...", "I..." you are here not alone. Start to think "we". I'm also autistic, and I know what the hell it is. Not everyone is strong enough or has mild treats to cope with it. Especially another autistic person should know it's a spectrum, and we get different levels of treats and different treats... so... you made it, and you are thick-skinned and strong, but others aren't able to cope with it so easily... is it their fault they were born that way? Is it a reason to hurt them?

[IslaTheWitch]

and I also have ADD and some other shortcuts I'm not proud of because they change my everyday life into hell. so what?

[IslaTheWitch]

and because people are not considerate, law must be. It's sad, but to let everyone live peacefully, it's needed.

[Juxtapose]

It is the duty of every adult to not let other people's words control them. It is like taking care of your own laundry, washing your dishes and so on. It should be a basic adult skill to handle insults without having some government step in on your behalf.

If your life is being clearly threatened (incitement) then yeah, that's not free speech. Saying: "I will end (name here)" is incitement. Calling you nasty names is not.

[Juxtapose]

I told a friend in Germany what you said and they had this to say:

"ugh, I really hate this almost stereotypical uninformed german arrogance this person vibes"

"ask him about Böhmermann xD
they wanted to send him to jail bc he insulted the turkish president in a song"

"did you know it's illegal to insult people in germany, in theory you can't even flip anyone off, when you do that while driving they actually enforce that from time to time"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_B%C3%B6hmermann

"

[IslaTheWitch]

said words are the talker's responsibility

[IslaTheWitch]

I know the Böhmermann case; people who work in satire take risks... it happens in every country, it's nothing new or strange...

In October 2016, prosecutors dropped the case, saying they had not found sufficient evidence to continue the inquiry against Böhmermann.[29] Subsequently, in 2018, the rarely used paragraph 103 of Germany's penal code, which criminalized insults against foreign heads of state, under which Böhmermann was indicted, was abolished.

[KrakenAttackin]

So, tow the party line or be arrested.

[IslaTheWitch]

@KrakenAttackin everyone sees what want to see...

[Juxtapose]

The fact that a comedian was charged at all for making fun of a foreign head of state should give you pause, Witch.

[KrakenAttackin]

@islathewitch. That's because your "openly expressed opinions" are in line with the sanctioned government approved thought.

[IslaTheWitch]

@KrakenAttackin no, because they are expressed with respect to my opponents as fellow people.

Even here, I don't call names, I address messages and in doubts ask for independent data.

[IslaTheWitch]

@KrakenAttackin and there is a reason, you respect me, right? Because you had my respect from the beginning :)

[KrakenAttackin]

@islathewitch. Respect can't be LEGISLATED and lack of respect CRIMINALIZED.

Once again I see how different Americans and the UK are.

[Juxtapose]

💯 right Kraken!

[IslaTheWitch]

@KrakenAttackin but offending others can be legislated. And is, even in the USA

[Juxtapose]

No, it isn't.

[Juxtapose]

"Under the First Amendment of the U. S. Constitution, people cannot be prosecuted simply for their beliefs. People may be offended or upset about beliefs that are untrue or based upon false stereotypes, but it is not a crime to express offensive beliefs, or to join with others who share such views."

www.justice.gov/.../learn-about-hate-crimes

[Juxtapose]

I can believe in something offensive based on a false stereotype, such as some kind of racist or sexist thing and it is not a crime to express those views or join with others who share those views.

[Juxtapose]

The same cannot be said for Germany.

[IslaTheWitch]

we say about offending someone not with beliefs but with false accusations, and it's criminalized in almost every country, including the USA and Germany

[Juxtapose]

That's not offense. Offending you is calling you a nasty name, your feelings get hurt and you don't like it.

Levying false accusations against somebody and doing it knowing they are false? That is slander or libel. Slander or libel is not comparable to doing something like calling someone a bitch or whatever.

[Juxtapose]

However I am free to levy false accusations against you if I actually believe they are true. The burden of proof would be on you in court to prove that I know in my head those accusations are false.

Good luck with that.

[KrakenAttackin]

@Juxtapose. This is a prime example of the bad things that happen when women obtain power.

[Juxtapose]

@KrakenAttackin whoa whoa I wouldn't go that far! Although I have been noticing with age that men just have a way of thinking that makes so much more sense than how women tend to think. But of course I have bias.

[Juxtapose]

My number one criticism of women is how much they overvalue other people's feelings. They can have princess syndrome and don't know what it's like to be a guy and not get immediate validation.

[KrakenAttackin]

@Juxtapose. As we discussed before, women enter traditionally male spaces and immediately begin policing speech and tone. This questions example is female "policing" taken to a sickening level.

[KrakenAttackin]

@islathewitch. Your feelings should not restrain my liberty. THIS is a core tenant of American values. We don't cater to the lowest common denominator victim (well, not until recently anyway). Americans have had it with political correctness and being bullied by professional victims. THIS is why you are seeing such a huge pushback against "trans rights" in the U. S. It's not that people care about sexual orientation (most don't), it's the bullying that comes with the LGBTQIA+ Mafia.

Again, your feelings cannot be allowed to curtail my RIGHTS.

[KrakenAttackin]

@islathewitch. You want the jackboot of government to protect your feelings.

[IslaTheWitch]

@KrakenAttackin I won't argue, you see what you want to see and read from my words what you want to read... you are not ready to see different point of view, so you try force on me your understanding of my words. I've never mentioned emotions.

[KrakenAttackin]

@islathewitch. "Respect" is about emotions.

[Cheerguy]

@IslaTheWitch you don't respect any views other than your own yet have a go at others for disagreeing with you by saying they are forcing their views on you.

Your opinion is not really special

[Snakeyes7]

The fourth reich has started and they didn't even notice apparently.

[Juxtapose]

^^ this 💯

You can even get arrested for flipping people off and cops enforce it.

Liberate Europe from fascism! ✊

[Snakeyes7]

I don't think the Nazis and fascists are the same thing but they are pure corruption all the same.

[laly520]

they do have free speech in fact but with conditions

some limitations attached to it to keep it more respectful

[Juxtapose]

That ain't free speech. If you can't be disrespectful how the hell is that free speech?

[Juxtapose]

You're going to offend somebody no matter what you say so trying not to offend everybody is pointless.

[NYCQuestions1976]

Maybe they mistake the multiple voices having arguments in their heads as free speech.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@Juxtapose
https://youtu.be/Kj2tp8eOJHE?si=ycqlUky7ybYl0kk8

[NYCQuestions1976]

GaG test post.

[OddBeMe]

Yeah…Europe has a huge problem there that, I think, induces a lot racism.

Just shows you, a meme about freedom doesn’t mean actual freedom. Needs to be fucking law.

[Juxtapose]

How does Europe's problem with speech relate to racism? Is it because suppressed speech just makes that suppressed speech more popular and enticing?

[OddBeMe]

Because they have zero tolerance of Nazi meme’d shit (not that surprising) it creates a bottleneck of hatred that has no expression.

[Juxtapose]

Wow I think we're actually in agreement here.

So do you agree with this quote Obama gave?

[OddBeMe]

*robot voice* Of course…our dear leader and messiah is perfect. He can do no wrong.

Yeah he was a smart mo fo. Didn’t agree with some larger issues, but he’s one of the best presidents in the last half century. Clinton, despite his seducing a vulnerable intern and then lying to the public and Congress, is also on the top 5.

[Juxtapose]

I am frankly not a fan of Obama and I think he is corrupt but I think he knows what the Constitution is supposed to be like and when he wants to appeal to people he will tell them how it is supposed to be like. He is a Constitutional law professor from what I remember.

[OddBeMe]

Funny you think that without any evidence whatsoever…and think Trump is innocent based off no evidence whatsoever. Evidence to the contrary: mountains.

[Juxtapose]

We could go back and forth on Obama and Trump forever but let's focus on our agreement that Obama was right about this.

[OddBeMe]

I don’t think Obama and Trump are in the same fckin ballpark. But sure. We do agree

[handsomelad70]

I'm all for free speech if it doesn't cross the line into inciting hate-based violence toward folk with discrete traits. (Race, sex, religion, gender identity, nationality, etc.)

[KrakenAttackin]

@handsomelad70. Than you are not for free speech.

[handsomelad70]

@KrakenAttackin Yes, I am. Free speech DOES NOT involve inciting violence towards certain disliked groups. (See" among other Nazi propagandists, Julius Streicher, their Minister of Propaganda, who published an anti-Semitic newspaper before using his ministry to advance hateful messages against Jews and others which eventually led to the Holocaust.) Is that what you want, boyo? (Don't say it couldn't happen in North America;people worldwide are susceptible to committing genocide under the right circumstances.)

[KrakenAttackin]

@handsomelad70. Genocide and free speech are very different issues. Hitler (an ardent socialist) did not allow free speech so your comparison is void.

[handsomelad70]

@KrakenAttackin Hitler was an anti-Semite who called his organization the NATIONAL Socialist Party as a means of luring German citizens who might have been left-wing into his avowedly capitalistic party.(It disbanded unions to draw corporations who used slave labour.) The Rohm purge of June 30-July 2,1934 was Hitler's way of cleansing the Nazis of true socialists.(And gays, as SS Chief Ernst Rohm was executed at least partly because of a tryst with an 18-year-old German lad.)

[KrakenAttackin]

The Germans were the first to go full cuck.

[DrPepper12]

Why do Americans think they have free speech but they're arresting journalists at these college campuses in LA and New York?

[Juxtapose]

By American law that is unconstitutional and it will not stand the test of scrutiny. Constitutional lawyers will easily tear that apart.

[Juxtapose]

And most of the people being arrested aren't even students or journalists, they are agitators that are paid by George Soros to riot.

[Juxtapose]

Also I don't recall Americans ever being dragged out of their homes for posting things online. Your "what aboutisms" doesn't change how bad Germany is.

[DrPepper12]

False. Not even "the" is correct.

[Juxtapose]

It is true.

"German police conduct raids against people suspected of posting misogynistic hate speech online"

apnews.com/.../germany-women-misogyny-raids-internet-hate-crime-31d3e61aab90bdce3f6f0d96e21d0fe4

Imagine defending such Stalinist nonsense.

[goaded]

What if that article would say: "American police conduct raids against people suspected of distributing child pornography online."?

What's illegal is illegal.

[Juxtapose]

@goaded child pornography is not free speech it is footage of a crime just like filming two chickens in a cock fight is but way worse.

[Juxtapose]

Respect can't be LEGISLATED and lack of respect CRIMINALIZED.

[goaded]

Nobody's talking about respect, just libel and slander.

[Astarlessnightsky]

We, there are only a handfull of things regulated by law like Nazi paroles and denying the holocaust which are banned for good reason.

[Astarlessnightsky]

We do got free speech...

[Juxtapose]

No, you can be arrested just for flipping people off. Go try it next time you drive, cops sometimes enforce it.