They're jumping through mental hoops with the ruling.
The way I understand it, it's not what was said that was illegal, but the fact that it was said with "divisive intent," or some shit.
Basically, you're not allowed to say things that hurt people's feelings or things that might make people not like a shitty religion, and somehow that restriction does not infringe on your freedom of speech or expression.
In other words, it's the arbitrary rule of hurt feelings that governs now. As if that's anything new in Eurabia.
I wanted you to be wrong so badly. But it really seems that's the… decision? Rationale seems too strong, but even decision is misleading here. Judicial Feeling has to be an oxymoron though, right?
Someone up for making an image of the judge as The Feeler? Maybe split contrast with Bush: 2001, The Decider?
The intellectual collapse here is infuriating. Will this be energizing domestic opposition, and maybe worldwide contempt? Who is proud of this cowardice?!
view the rest of the comments →
Hayashimo ago
They're jumping through mental hoops with the ruling.
The way I understand it, it's not what was said that was illegal, but the fact that it was said with "divisive intent," or some shit.
Basically, you're not allowed to say things that hurt people's feelings or things that might make people not like a shitty religion, and somehow that restriction does not infringe on your freedom of speech or expression.
In other words, it's the arbitrary rule of hurt feelings that governs now. As if that's anything new in Eurabia.
PapShamir ago
I wanted you to be wrong so badly. But it really seems that's the… decision? Rationale seems too strong, but even decision is misleading here. Judicial Feeling has to be an oxymoron though, right?
Someone up for making an image of the judge as The Feeler? Maybe split contrast with Bush: 2001, The Decider?
The intellectual collapse here is infuriating. Will this be energizing domestic opposition, and maybe worldwide contempt? Who is proud of this cowardice?!