Dasa and the thought police

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Calls for genocide sir are a tad more than political incorrectness.

Boy, when you are wrong, you really go to town with it.

Robbie should get the award of the Golden Shovel, for being the poster most skilled at digging morality pits, falling into them himself and then sticking his finger in his ears and shouting "lalalalalalalalala" at those peering over the edge at him.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
there you go, pandering to fear. Why are you so afraid divegeester, are you afraid the thought police will get you too? actually my thread is about freedom of thought and condemning people for thinking 'stuff', I have repeated it to you about three times now and still you have failed to grasp it. I doubt you will ever really be able to grasp it, it ...[text shortened]... te in order to uncover any character flaws or misrepresentation evidence favoring canonization."

You appear to be a dasa apologist. This whole thread seems to be about your belief that dasa was unfairly banned. However you don't know what you are arguing about; first you say that his posts were idle threats, he didn't mean it. Then you are saying he did mean it but was "goaded". You are just running around the proverbial yard, pants at ankles, dummy in mouth, sqawking aimlessly and pretending you are right about something which you simply cannot articulate.

Originally posted by divegeester
You appear to be a dasa apologist. This whole thread seems to be about your belief that dasa was unfairly banned. However you don't know what you are arguing about; first you say that his posts were idle threats, he didn't mean it. Then you are saying he did mean it but was "goaded". You are just running around the proverbial yard, pants at ankles, dummy ...[text shortened]... wking aimlessly and pretending you are right about something which you simply cannot articulate.

hear that? its the sound of ideas flying above your head. Time to kick you back into touch for attempts to make debate personal. Cya.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
hear that? its the sound of ideas flying above your head. Time to kick you back into touch for attempts to make debate personal. Cya.

Was the content of dasa's posts, the ones he was banned for, material that was worthy of a banning?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I cannot say with any certainty what Dasa did other than he seemed to harbour extreme anti Islamic views, this is because I rarely read his text. I understand that some held that these views were disgusting and extreme. It really got me wondering though whether merely 'thinking' disturbing or offensive thoughts warranted a banning or even constitut ...[text shortened]... me kind of 'thought police' and reported him to the site administration for his 'thought crime'?

Er, your own bible says 'in your heart so you are'. Did you forget that part?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
hear that? its the sound of ideas flying above your head. Time to kick you back into touch for attempts to make debate personal. Cya.

With the thread title as given, how is this debate not going to be personal?

Originally posted by finnegan
With the thread title as given, how is this debate not going to be personal?

robbie's own thread title had already become inconvenient to him before his thread had reached the end of page 1.

Originally posted by finnegan
With the thread title as given, how is this debate not going to be personal?

because my Celtic cousin Dasa is simply a convenient effigy if you like for the real issue at hand, that being the act of condemnation levelled against others for thinking and expressing, thoughts. Yes they were abusive. Yes they were intolerant· Yes they sought to vilify others and yes they were the projection of a mind that was filled with prejudice and hatred. But they were still only the expression of thoughts, bigoted and spiteful and ugly thoughts.

Perhaps I am more conditioned to it because of the activity of going from house to house with Bible in hand where I have been subject to some rather hateful speech and actions although for the most part people are polite, I don't know. As long as they are not threatening I don't mind because I realise that its simply a reflection of their disposition at that point in time and may change, people can and do change.

What is clear is that there is all kinds of legislation afoot aimed at limiting freedom of thought and expression and the Orwellian vision is now truly upon us like never before.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
What is clear is that there is all kinds of legislation afoot aimed at limiting freedom of thought and expression and the Orwellian vision is now truly upon us like never before.

It's called the "RHP Terms of Service" you twisted paranoid doofus.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Er, your own bible says 'in your heart so you are'. Did you forget that part?

I addressed it in my opening comments, you may need to read them again.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
What is clear is that there is all kinds of legislation afoot aimed at limiting freedom of thought and expression and the Orwellian vision is now truly upon us like never before.

How has Dasa's "freedom of thought" been limited?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
because my Celtic cousin Dasa is simply a convenient effigy if you like for the real issue at hand, that being the act of condemnation levelled against others for thinking and expressing, thoughts. Yes they were abusive. Yes they were intolerant· Yes they sought to vilify others and yes they were the projection of a mind that was filled with prejud ...[text shortened]... d. But they were still only the expression of thoughts, bigoted and spiteful and ugly thoughts.

Would you be willing to defend Muslims from violent attacks or treatment of the kind Dasa called for by using physical force yourself if you came across a situation where people of that religion were under assault or in danger at the hands of people animated by the same kind of hate speech as Dasa propagated?

Originally posted by FMF
Would you be willing to defend Muslims from violent attacks or treatment of the kind Dasa called for by using physical force yourself if you came across a situation where people of that religion were under assault or in danger at the hands of people animated by the same kind of hate speech as Dasa propagated?

I will answer this while ignoring your vain attempts to make debate personal because its partly relevant.

Thoughts and the expression of thoughts are fine, however if those thoughts express an intent to commit violence or incite others to commit violence then they are in danger of going beyond the realm of mere thought and manifest themselves in overt action. However even here there is cause for consideration for one must consider the likelihood of these thoughts actually being carried out.

If for example Dasa had stated that he had a Death star hidden far out in the galaxy and planned to disintegrate all Muslims with his death-ray then we are free to dismiss the chances of overt action as being extremely unlikely and his threats as pure fantasy. If however he ordered a Death star built and hired Grand Moff Tarkin then we have cause for concern. Thus even if advocating violence against others one distinguishes between the validity of the claim and the likely hood of it being carried out by overt action. There is such a thing as a fantasy defence.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I will answer this while ignoring your vain attempts to make debate personal because its partly relevant.

On page you appeared to allude to what you perceive as your own "bravery" in standing up for Dasa when you said: "...to stand up to thought police and to champion freedom of thought and freedom of expression even for those whose views we abhor takes not only a greater degree of bravery but also a greater degree of tolerance".

So, what "bravery" do you believe you exhibit with regard to the people who are the targets of his hate speech?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie

Thoughts and the expression of thoughts are fine, however if those thoughts express an intent to commit violence or incite others to commit violence then they are in danger of going beyond the realm of mere thought and manifest themselves in overt action. However even here there is cause for consideration for one must consider the likelihood of these thoughts actually being carried out.

If for example Dasa had stated that he had a Death star hidden far out in the galaxy and planned to disintegrate all Muslims with his death-ray then we are free to dismiss the chances of overt action as being extremely unlikely and his threats as pure fantasy. If however he ordered a Death star built and hired Grand Moff Tarkin then we have cause for concern. Thus even if advocating violence against others one distinguishes between the validity of the claim and the likely hood of it being carried out by overt action. There is such a thing as a fantasy defence.

Once again then, because the above typed text dodged my question: what would you be willing to do to defend Muslims from violent attacks or treatment at the hands of people who shared the same ideas and proposals as were contained in the kind of hate speech as Dasa propagated?