Comments on: Spanish Group Sues Madrid Pride For Pope Remarks

By: ousslander

ousslander — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:10:35 +0000

oh no 15, so if you stab me to death you get a couple of years but if you stab me to death and say craker or fag you should get twenty, i’m still dead. Murder is murder and putting a higher value on others is wrong.
I though a rant was full of yelling and anger. I was just being sarcastic.so you should be fined for your hate speech by calling me a troll?

By: Little one

Little one — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 10:47:01 +0000

mark (11) who said ‘NAZI Youth movement Rattzinger’

That is just a smokescreen!

Ratzinger is not what he seems (in more ways than one)!

Check his dark eye area and unusual complexion for a German (especially in pictures where he was younger).

He is also not where he is now by coincidence or because he was elected!

The rest you must figure out for yourself!

I wonder if you will?

By: Endymnion

Endymnion — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 10:30:33 +0000

@ 7 Â· tallskin who said ‘But they started this war over 2,000 years ago when christianity conquered the roman world and they then banned homosexuality.’

For the sheeple ONLY!

By: Willie Hewes

Willie Hewes — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 09:21:14 +0000

I hope they win, because that’s going to bite them in the ass soooo badly!

By: l

Wed, 30 Jul 2008 07:16:50 +0000

The problem is there is lots of speech that does not endorse violence, but leads directly to it. For example, referring to people as subhuman. The Nazis routinely called jews dogs or rats. How about ascribing crimes to an entire group: Gays kidnap and torture children; gay coupling is like bestiality; homos are traitors to the state. Personally, I don’t think the Pope is a protected class. He chose to wear that dress.

By: Jaroslaw

Jaroslaw — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 23:06:37 +0000

It’s really not that complicated. They have hate speech laws in Canada. Which the religious right here lied about, like they always do to confuse people – what the law actually says is hate speech is designed to inflame people to hurt or kill or otherwise inflict damage on the marginalized or minority group. Churches are given exemptions up to the point they would, say, advocate quarantines, killings, exterminations, push for removal of legal protections of Gays for example, things like that. They are perfectly free to say homosexuality is a sin.

By: CTnSF

CTnSF — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 21:12:23 +0000

Ordinarily, I would not respond to the immature rant of a troll like ouslander, but this issue is too serious to be taken this lightly. Gay, lesbian and transgendered people are being killed in the streets of America and if it takes hate speech laws to stop the cycle and pathology of violence, so be it.

By: mark

mark — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 21:06:53 +0000

psssst Ratzinger,

Hold on to your rosary…you just LOST America same sex marriage battle, MA allows same sex marriages to ALL couples from ALL states.

Man up Rattzi, and wipe your nose on the back of an altar boy’s robe.

By: ousslander

ousslander — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 20:26:06 +0000

He said bad things about me and called me names let me rn to the nanny state to protect my delicate little feelings. Hate speech laws make the “victims” look weak and in need of extra care. It’s a infantilization thing.
Oh poor babies, do needs to change your diapers and kiss your boo-boo?

By: CTnSF

CTnSF — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 19:38:54 +0000

Laws banning hate speech are similar to the laws enhancing the penalty for criminal acts motivated by hate for a particular group. These laws serve to protect the more powerless groups, including gays in some states. Spain is not alone in banning hate speech. Britain, Canada, France, Sweden, Germany and others, all have similar laws.

Of course a social deginerate and rabid bigot like churchilly would be against any law banning hate speech so he can safely continue to express his narrow-minded and bigoted thoughts. He is the poster child for why such laws can sometimes be necessary.

By: mark

mark — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 18:56:41 +0000

NAZI Youth movement Rattzinger

Take your Prada pumps, ermine capes, and jeweled tiarra…and cry me a G*D DAMN RIVER.

By: CHURCHILL-Y

CHURCHILL-Y — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 18:49:01 +0000

Its a pretty dangerous tightrope act to want the government to regulate speech, sooner or later it backfires on those who were for it with good intentions as shown by this. In this country it was used in the past to suppress anything from publications to speech that had
anything to do with us, it still does in a majority of states so why would any Homo be in favor of this is beyond me. I’m a great admirer of Spain but this is where I part ways with them, they are going from progressive to bordeline communist.

By: mark

mark — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 18:06:36 +0000

Simply reading the names and costs of buggering altar boys….might feel like HATE SPEECH, but it’s just the FACTS.

By: mark

mark — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 18:04:46 +0000

The Catholic Church’s good name?

I’m pretty sure that boat sailed with global pedofile scandals costing BILLIONS, which the current pope HID for a DECADE.

By: tallskin

tallskin — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:07:46 +0000

I think these right wing Katlicks are on dangerous ground with this action – cos the hate speech spouted against gays by the religiously afflicted could also be used back against them.

But we in the West are now deep into a big culture war, so be prepared for bigger battles, prolonged skirmishes and slaughtering of the innocents on both sides. War is never pretty.

But they started this war over 2,000 years ago when christianity conquered the roman world and they then banned homosexuality.

It is a war we have to win at all costs.

By: Darth Paul

Darth Paul — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:31:38 +0000

He WAS in charge of the CDF, which is what the Inquisition is now called. So there.

By: CTnSF

CTnSF — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:02:38 +0000

I disagree Kevin57. I think hate speech laws have there place, especially in places with a history of violence against marginalized and powerless groups. There are many types of legal restraints on certain speech. For instance, there are laws against derogatory and defamatory speech about a person’e charcter; you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater, etc. Similarly, speech which advocates violence or hate against a group of people should also be outlawed.

Of course, any law can be abused by someone for various reasons. The person may be mentally disturbed, or a person or group may be trying to make a mockery of the law because they oppose it, or a person or group could abuse the law to cause financial hardship against the other person or group. However, these abuses are few in number and the benefits in curbing anti-social behavior and speech outweigh the few shortcomings.

There are many obvious defenses to the lawsuit brought on behalf of the Catholic Church and I suspect that case will be over within 6 months. The societal benefits of prohibiting hate speech are infinite.

By: Erick

Erick — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:50:19 +0000

Bullshit in spanish? That would be Mierda de Toro. And thats exactly what this lawsuit is.

By: Lady Andatramph

Lady Andatramph — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:37:59 +0000

mierda de toro!

By: kevin57

kevin57 — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:20:00 +0000

This is Evidence #1 for avoiding “hate speech” laws. As infuriating as it is to have to hear hate against us, we preserve our own rights to speak freely.

By: Trenton

Trenton — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:57:14 +0000

Gilipollez. But I don’t think that’s going far enough…