What constitutes Extremism and hate-speech today?

[Qapla]

3 hours ago, Old said:

I believe  the law only applies to labeled mail slots

 

Yes, there are exceptions. If there is a slot that is used for a specific purpose and is labeled as such, like "drop payments here" or "deposit keys here" - that would not be a "mail slot" - but, when my brother worked for the Post Office, any "unlabeled" slot was viewed as a mail slot and was not to be used by anyone other than the USPS - even if there was a mailbox hanging right next to the door.

 

Our Congregation looked at any clarification to this a few years ago and it seems that the USPS still considers all slots as theirs unless otherwise designated and some other US Mailbox is supplied for that address.

 

In any event, I just make it a practice not to push things through doors into a person's home - be that a slot int the door or a gap in the door jam - or, even an open door ... and I have come across a few of those.

[Dave]

An interesting commentary about the current hate-speech debate:

http://nzh.tw/12224573

[Dave]

This debate could take on a more global context soon...

 

“Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and French President Emmanuel Macron will next month co-chair a meeting in Paris aimed at addressing how social media plays a part in promoting terrorism.”

http://nzh.tw/12224727

 

Will be interesting to see how this develops.

 

 

 

[Qapla]

The above post is another one I had trouble seeing in Dark Mode ... had to highlight the test to read all of it

[Brother_Bliss]

10 hours ago, Qapla said:

The above post is another one I had trouble seeing in Dark Mode ... had to highlight the test to read all of it

 

Well, get used to it. We're not going to correct every post you complain about.

 

[Qapla]

I realize that - only hoping that the ones posting will follow your admonition and leave the text color set to "automatic" ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PS - I guess I will quit mentioning it

Edited April 24, 2019 by Qapla

[Brother_Bliss]

@Qapla - please accept my apology for my harsher than usual before-I-had-coffee-comment. Let's take this discussion to the Dark Mode topic....

 

https://jwtalk.net/topic/39485-a-dark-mode-theme-poll/?do=findComment&comment=639577

[Lee49]

On 4/22/2019 at 2:55 PM, Cherie said:

One reason that only mail sent through USPS can be left in mailboxes is because businesses would print fliers and stuff our mailboxes full of "junk." 

Yeah, instead businesses use the USPS to stuff our mail boxes with "junk"! 😆

[Memeber212]

Hate speech does not exist. It is a recent Marxist invention with only one purpose - to censor discussions. There is no need to use that expression at all. There are other words that are more precise in describing hateful actions. In fact, term "hate speech" is so broad that can be used for anything and is very convenient while people are unable to respond to constructive criticism or logical arguments. Soon you won't be able to discuss about anything that may potentially hurt someone even emotionally.

[Thesauron]

20 hours ago, tarcamion said:

Hate speech does not exist. It is a recent Marxist invention with only one purpose - to censor discussions. There is no need to use that expression at all.

There is a definition: “(noun) abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice against a particular group, especially on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation.”

 

Please note that the language you use must be “abusive or threatening or express prejudice”. It does not include constructive criticism, if it’s even possible possible to constructively criticise anyone for being a jew, a romani, a Jehovah’s Witness, or born in Leeds.

[Memeber212]

3 hours ago, Thesauron said:

There is a definition: “(noun) abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice against a particular group, especially on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation.”

 

Please note that the language you use must be “abusive or threatening or express prejudice”. It does not include constructive criticism, if it’s even possible possible to constructively criticise anyone for being a jew, a romani, a Jehovah’s Witness, or born in Leeds.

Sure, you are right. But... Who decides when the language is abusive or threatening or expresses prejudice? Who defines hate? By what standards? The definition from your quote is not complete. And even the full definition is so broad that you can stretch it to cover all aspects of criticism and use it as a tool for censorship. Without answering to those questions I can quickly claim that what you preach is hateful because you tell me I will die in Armageddon. Do you get my point?

[Thesauron]

Sure, you are right. But... Who decides when the language is abusive or threatening or expresses prejudice? Who defines hate? By what standards? The definition from your quote is not complete. And even the full definition is so broad that you can stretch it to cover all aspects of criticism and use it as a tool for censorship. Without answering to those questions I can quickly claim that what you preach is hateful because you tell me I will die in Armageddon. Do you get my point?

What it means, exactly, is defined by the local legislators and the courts, as is the case with any law.

In Sweden, for example, it is defined as publicly making statements that threaten or express disrespect for an ethnic group or similar group regarding their race, skin colour, national or ethnic origin, faith, or sexual orientation. The crime does not prohibit a pertinent and responsible debate (en saklig och vederhäftig diskussion), nor statements made in a completely private sphere. The crime is called Hets mot folkgrupp in Swedish, which directly translates to Incitement (of hatred/violence) towards population groups.

The courts have been very clear that you cannot stretch it any way you want to. We can still say that we believe that anyone who practices homosexuality must be disfellowshipped, and that it is a sin which leads to death. We cannot, however, incite to violence or disrespect towards them. We can say that it is a sin to keep being a catholic when you know what the Bible teaches, and that it leads to death. But we cannot incite to violence or disrespect against catholics.

[Memeber212]

Exactly as you said. This is my point. It is defined by local governments vide the people. Since it is subject to local judiciary systems and is not based on anything like at least Roman law then is subject to modifications, interpretations and can be then modified to match current political or social climate. Sweden is a good example where Islam uses hate speech to the fullest extent and you can speak about Islam in positives or nothing at all.

Sent from my Mi A1 using Tapatalk

[Gimestr]

Am I missing something?  He just paraphrased 1 Cor 6:9,10.  Mind you he changed God's Kingdom to Hell which is incorrect, but he just paraphrased the bible.

[Shawnster]

27 minutes ago, Gimestr said:

Am I missing something?  He just paraphrased 1 Cor 6:9,10.  Mind you he changed God's Kingdom to Hell which is incorrect, but he just paraphrased the bible.

Shouting at people and telling them they are going to hell is not loving and kind.  It's pretty hateful, actually. 

 

We preach door to door and never tell people that.  

 

On the other hand, Bible thumper and evangelical types have been doing this for over 100 years and nobody has complained until now.  Suddenly it is hate speech.  

Edited April 29, 2019 by Shawnster

[BenJepthah]

On 4/22/2019 at 8:35 AM, Thesauron said:

Yes, I know that, I just find a bit odd that the US government has taken it upon themselves to decide what can and cannot go into mailboxes. Do you not have any private companies competing with the US Postal Service, the way many European countries do?

In short : no. The US postal service remains unapossed by competition even though this seems counterintuitive in a country that often promotes private enterprise.  As for the mailbox:  it is viewed as under federal jurisdiction so that nothing dangerous may be mailed. This is probably necessary due to the huge geographic region the USPS covers.

[BenJepthah]

The problem with the way the term “ hate speech “ is being applied is that it is 1. Highly subjective. “ Even some rather objectionable things that are said may be viewed as being well intended. Example: saying someone is going to hell if they don’t change their ways is not much different than saying someone will die at Armageddon if they don’t accept Jehovah’s will. 

        2. The hate speech label is often applied selectively. Any group with political influence may claim to be the victim of hate speech while clearly practicing hate speech themselves.  Example : the Hebrew Israelites in the Washington DC area unapologetically engage in vitriol ( if you’ve never heard of them it’s because they generally have gotten a pass from the Media ) while other much less vile things are magnified by the media for political reasons. 

      3) the label of hate speech is easily applied to innocent parties and very hard to defend against when parts of speech are taken out of context. In the past some actors and performers acted as abolitionists by lampooning racist ideologies . Their work may be presented out of context and claimed as hate speech. The same may be done by some to the written or spoken records of some of our own brothers and sisters.