[MD] Free Speech

[Platt Holden]

> [Arlo]
> So its okay to suggest lynchings, so long as you don't carry them out?
> If what you are saying is "any group advocating violence against others
> should be censored", I might understand. But you seem to give some
> groups a pass on advocating violence, while condemning others for it.
> Violence against others is violence. Whether advocated by the KKK or
> Hezbollah. No?

There's a difference between advocating (free speech) and acting 
(physical violence).

> [Platt]
> At least I'm not a hypocrite about being tolerant. Didn't you tell me
> that hypocrisy was a sin?
> 
> [Arlo]
> Please tell me what I said you find hypocritic? Yes, hypocrisy is a sign
> that you are relying on social-emotive tools rather than intellect.

How so? As for your hypocrisy, you claim tolerance, but bash who you
consider "stooopid" at every opportunity, like conservatives who speak 
at colleges for not living up to so-called academic standards, as if 
there was only one right way to think -- your way.   
 
> [Platt]
> Not any more, thanks to virtually wiping them out -- exactly what the
> world needs to do to Islamic terrorists, the sooner the better.
> 
> [Arlo]
> Here you seem to suggest that groups advocating violence are harmless if
> they lack the means to carry through with their threats. If the KKK were
> more organized, would they then become a group you would ban? Does this
> means its not the message, but the power that creates the need for
> censorship?

See above.