The hate is already there. You can’t speak to those who don’t want to listen. Sometimes civility is just an open invitation to enable our own oppression, because people who hate aren’t interested in having a dialogue, and are in fact counting on us valuing being ‘reasonable’ over being practical.
Also. Civil rights were not won by everybody coming together peacefully and just talking it out. They were won by riots and protests and people standing up and going “THIS SHIT ISNT OK” and making the lives of those who already have those rights more difficult. It has never been by “uwu please treat us like actual human being” and calmly and gently trying to parley with literal supremacists and genociders
That too but I didn’t wanna go full tilt on ‘em tbh.
never forget that MLK was labled a terrorist and racists regularly claimed he was protesting wrong so in general when people say youre protesting wrong, what they really mean is that they would rather you just submit to oppression.
kazard said:
@jasondarkflame Peel v. Attorney Reg. & Discip. Comm'n “
“True threats of violence” that are directed at a person or group of persons that have the intent of placing the target at risk of bodily harm or death are generally unprotected.” Hate Groups especially folks like Neo Nazis and the KKK embody speech not protected by the first amendment. So that sort of speech is already banned.
alana-catherine-sky said:
@kazard I’m arguing we shouldn’t rely on the government to restrict speech. The freedom of speech was created so speaking truth to power was a right that couldn’t be denied. If we give the government the ability to ban speech it could be detrimental to everyone’s freedom.
I am Silver Tongue, I am an artist. I have many characters and you can check out my art in the art tag. I occasionally practice witchcraft though I don't do anything too complicated. I am girl 2 and don't know what else to put here.
aninnocuousautosave liked this
cns-shitefest liked this 
chudsis liked this 
emtechie reblogged this from pasteldaemon myhorrorpony liked this
daemonica liked this
punjester9000 liked this
captiankatsura reblogged this from shuppityduppity
shuppityduppity reblogged this from pasteldaemon
practicingbushiho said: Don’t you guys get it, people just want to support ethnic cleansing in peace! Freedom of speech, right!?!?!?
saintoflostmonsters liked this
bunnymadeofbread liked this
host-of-madness liked this
gudyote liked this
pyrotechnical-difficulties reblogged this from pasteldaemon
froggieweather liked this greyvs reblogged this from pasteldaemon
tpest liked this
esperhabasi reblogged this from pasteldaemon and added:
hypnosoflethe liked this
uncletarby liked this
buraketto liked this
goblinbongwater reblogged this from esperhabasi
kittyklippings liked this ultimaakuma liked this
pharo212 liked this eri-boden liked this
kazard said: @jasondarkflame Peel v. Attorney Reg. & Discip. Comm'n “ “True threats of violence” that are directed at a person or group of persons that have the intent of placing the target at risk of bodily harm or death are generally unprotected.” Hate Groups especially folks like Neo Nazis and the KKK embody speech not protected by the first amendment. So that sort of speech is already banned.
whatthefuckinnef reblogged this from pasteldaemon
alana-catherine-sky said: @kazard I’m arguing we shouldn’t rely on the government to restrict speech. The freedom of speech was created so speaking truth to power was a right that couldn’t be denied. If we give the government the ability to ban speech it could be detrimental to everyone’s freedom.
cloudynightjoy-blog liked this
snakerocket liked this
