You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Free Speech, the Gab/Andrew Torba way
November 21 2024 7.52pm

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Free Speech, the Gab/Andrew Torba way

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 5 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >

  

Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 24 Sep 21 9.36am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Badger11

Wow.

They were targetted by gay activists they were quite happy to produce a cake for anyone just not the pro gay marriage message. This case was about whose rights were being infringed.

The court correctly decided that the gay person did not have the right to insist that the bakers put a message they could not agree with.

If the court had upheld the decision it could mean for instance that a Muslim or black baker could be forced to produce a cake with something they felt offensive on.

FYI Peter Tatchell the gay rights activist agreed with the court decision as he could see the wider implications. This was never about "get out your gay I'm not serving you".

I really don't to get deflected onto the "cake bakers" debate again. It's been done to death! I could see both sides of the argument, and understood that the bakers were deliberately targetted to get a reaction. Nevertheless, I do believe that the underlying principle at stake, namely that if you offer a service for reward, then you leave any personal beliefs on the doorstep, was incorrectly assessed by the Court, who took the view that they could be used as a justification for refusal.

I disagreed. If there was no monitory transaction involved, then the judgement was correct but as soon as it became commercial, personal opinions get put aside.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 24 Sep 21 9.46am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by becky

Maybe, but it does refute your point as to whether "someone can use their religious belief as a justification to break the law and not be prosecuted as a consequence?"

Polygamy is against the Law in this country, but is not only ignored when practiced by certain people, but actively supported, in many cases, by the provision of social housing.

Not really. They can, and should, be prosecuted. If the authorities are deciding not to prosecute, then that's a criticism of the authorities and not the law.

Without wanting to get diverted, I wonder how many actual cases of polygamy there are? Someone taking a second partner isn't polygamy unless an actual marriage is involved. It might be considered immoral, but isn't illegal. Any resultant family would be entitled to the same treatment as any other family.

The issue is about whether people are ever above the law because of a religious belief. Not whether the law is sometimes not being applied in full.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Stirlingsays Flag 24 Sep 21 11.16am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

As stated homosexuality was illegal for centuries, so under WE persecution is what he wants for anyone breaking the law. So the WE of those times would be fully on board with persecuting homosexuals.

It's a fallacious argument to suggest people think it's ok to just break the law, no one said that.

However, it's also ridiculous to regard the law as something that rises above any consideration and must be obeyed independent of circumstance.

There is context, there are bad laws and bad regimes and there is the human right to decide which of those apply. There are many laws on the books that aren't applied in practice for many reasons.

Torba is rightly protected under the first amendment. WE can squirm all he likes but my advice is to stop visiting his site. He also represents millions of people who regard silicon valley as anti free speech.

I find WE's views on quite a few subjects abhorrent. However, I wouldn't agree that he should be persecuted for them or pushed underground.

WE doesn't seem to realise that his views and indeed social liberalism within society are only in the ascendency now because they were allowed to rise in the past....during far more conservative environments.

Essentially an environment where political ideas you don't like aren't allowed to compete with your own is wholly anti western.


Edited by Stirlingsays (24 Sep 2021 11.58am)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 24 Sep 21 11.18am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

The guy is pathologically dishonest.

Countering argument with insult is the last refuge of the intellectually defeated.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jeeagles Flag 24 Sep 21 11.21am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Not really. They can, and should, be prosecuted. If the authorities are deciding not to prosecute, then that's a criticism of the authorities and not the law.

Without wanting to get diverted, I wonder how many actual cases of polygamy there are? Someone taking a second partner isn't polygamy unless an actual marriage is involved. It might be considered immoral, but isn't illegal. Any resultant family would be entitled to the same treatment as any other family.

The issue is about whether people are ever above the law because of a religious belief. Not whether the law is sometimes not being applied in full.

In cases like the cake and turban issue, the people involved aren't necessarily breaking the law. It's more that their are conflicting laws, or laws which are drafted in a way that could be misinterpreted, then they are tested in court.

Polygamy in this country is possibly impossible from a legal perspective as second marriage cannot be legally binding.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Stirlingsays Flag 24 Sep 21 11.22am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

It's not an insult, it's what I believe is the truth, just as is the recognition that you are intelligent.

Also let's remember that you once called me a sub species, and have used 'insults' many times....you even called this a far right site. So on this summary intellectual defeat must be something you regularly feel.

I believe your condition is how you deal with it.

Edited by Stirlingsays (24 Sep 2021 11.27am)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 24 Sep 21 11.30am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

As stated homosexuality was illegal for centuries, so under WE persecution is what he wants for anyone breaking the law. So the WE of those times would be fully on board with persecuting homosexuals.

It's a fallacious argument to suggest people think it's ok to just break the law, no one said that.

However, it's also ridiculous to regard the law as something that rises above any consideration and must be obeyed independent of circumstance.

There is context, there are bad laws and bad regimes and there is the human right to decide which of those apply. There are many laws on the books that aren't applied in practice for many reasons.

Torba is rightly protected under the first amendment. WE can squirm all he likes but my advice is to stop visiting his site. He also represents millions of people who regard silicon valley as anti free speech.

I fine WE's views on quite a few subjects abhorrent. However, I wouldn't agree that he should be persecuted for them or pushed underground.

WE doesn't seem to realise that his views and indeed social liberalism within society are only in the ascendency now because they were allowed to rise in the past....during far more conservative environments.

Essentially an environment where political ideas you don't like aren't allowed to compete with your own is wholly anti western.

Edited by Stirlingsays (24 Sep 2021 11.19am)

Not the issue. Plenty of campaigns have been run by people deciding to break the law to draw attention to an unfairness, and have won. Indeed, many welcomed prosecutions as they provided the oxygen of publicity they needed they get acceptance within society, and the law changed.

Torba doesn't appear to think like that. He wants to create a totally separate economy, and presumably the legal system needed to support it. He doesn't want to work within the system.

For those interested, try reading this opinion piece. There is a lot more going on here than a simple claim of seeking "free speech":-

[Link]

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 24 Sep 21 11.33am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by jeeagles

In cases like the cake and turban issue, the people involved aren't necessarily breaking the law. It's more that their are conflicting laws, or laws which are drafted in a way that could be misinterpreted, then they are tested in court.

Polygamy in this country is possibly impossible from a legal perspective as second marriage cannot be legally binding.

Fair points. The law though applied, even if it needed to be clarified.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 24 Sep 21 11.43am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

It's not an insult, it's what I believe is the truth, just as is the recognition that you are intelligent.

Also let's remember that you once called me a sub species, and have used 'insults' many times....you even called this a far right site. So on this summary intellectual defeat must be something you regularly feel.

I believe your condition is how you deal with it.

Edited by Stirlingsays (24 Sep 2021 11.27am)

Spending weeks trawling back to be able to find comments which resemble those I am accused of making, and then setting them in context, is not something I have either the time, or inclination to do. There would though have been a context, and without it, they are meaningless.

This site is disproportionately much further to the right than the views held by the average British person. Whether you regard that as "far" right will always depend on how far along the spectrum you are yourself.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Stirlingsays Flag 24 Sep 21 11.46am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

You know that site just speaks, 'one nation conservative' to me. All claims of dishonesty are hence ended.

Torba isn't doing or saying anything against the law. Once again, he represents millions who disagree with how Silicon valley operates. Indeed, even if he were breaking laws then by your own words he has the rights to resist.

I don't know Torba's views on it but someone like me believes that a peaceful separation in the US is desirable because otherwise conflict is inevitable....I think WE kind of represents why it's inevitable.
I want the least bloody outcome where people on the left or right can live comfortably within political states.

Edited by Stirlingsays (24 Sep 2021 11.48am)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jeeagles Flag 24 Sep 21 12.39pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Spending weeks trawling back to be able to find comments which resemble those I am accused of making, and then setting them in context, is not something I have either the time, or inclination to do. There would though have been a context, and without it, they are meaningless.

This site is disproportionately much further to the right than the views held by the average British person. Whether you regard that as "far" right will always depend on how far along the spectrum you are yourself.

The number of users on the site also appear to be dwindling, as a handful of far right posters keep turning everything into an issue about ethnicities, imigration and how hard done by they are.

Now it's predictably time for the PA supporter trying to claim he's not far right...

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Stirlingsays Flag 24 Sep 21 1.10pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by jeeagles

The number of users on the site also appear to be dwindling, as a handful of far right posters keep turning everything into an issue about ethnicities, imigration and how hard done by they are.

Now it's predictably time for the PA supporter trying to claim he's not far right...

I don't really care what a centralist desperate to be liked by leftists thinks I am.

I'm a social conservative and compared to today's right I'm more Norman Tebbit than Cameron.....or in your fantasy world I'm sitting here with a Hitler poster on the wall practicing my goose stepping.

Believe what you want to believe....while you still have the privilege.

Edited by Stirlingsays (24 Sep 2021 1.11pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

  

Page 5 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Free Speech, the Gab/Andrew Torba way