This comic is funny but equivocates on “freedom of speech”. Most people who are concerned about limitations on free expression are not talking about the first amendment. It’s goal post shifting to think this comic addresses the primary concern.
1 Like
3 Likes
Y’all are hopeless. Cactus could start a thread titled “Hi I’m a troll who wants to troll you” and it would still get 100’s of posts.
There are some states where I can’t jog with a loaded pistol in my waistband. Is our God-given second amendment right being trampled on by overbearing state governments? Are the founders turning over in their collective graves?
5 Likes
I need to get his opinion on Pho
3 Likes
99.999999% of scientific and technological advances throughout human history until like five years ago came about through the works of individuals who were bigoted as fuck.
That Dawkins is able to eloquently dunk on creationists doesn’t prevent him from having dumb and bigoted views about an issue that requires having some degree of empathy to grasp.
I suppose I’m likely responding to a troll here, but what makes the tweet transphobic is the use of the straw man bigots always invoke about trans people that they are denying some objective biological truth. That the terms transgender and cisgender exist is more or less enough to shoot down that bs.
9 Likes
Define “speech”, define “hate speech”, and define “fair game”.
No and also womp womp for these people
1 Like
Yes you are. Most Brits find him snooty and pompous to listen to.
The only book of his I’ve read, The Blind Watchmaker, is top notch but his sociopolitical views are crass.
No, we aren’t in danger of losing freedom of speech.
2 Likes
“So you really” isn’t an argument, it’s just an attempt to make it sound ridiculous to even disagree with you.
I’m way more concerned about how many bills right now are criminalizing protest than I am that someone faced consequences for spouting off bigoted ideas about something they didn’t bother to really learn about.
6 Likes
This sounds right, Dawkins made one argument very effectively and became very famous. It’s a common mistake for people to then lazily categorize him as a Wise Man and assume his opinions on everything are meaningful.
1 Like
Only wealthy white people ever had free speech in the sense of being able to spout any dumb opinion you happen to hold and get taken seriously. They are possibly losing that in the face of a wider range of people who can tell them their ideas are dumb and they should feel bad right to their face (or at least to their twitter avatar).
Poor people and minorities have always been beaten arrested and worse whenever they tried to express the opinion that maybe things should be different. Getting “cancelled” in the back of a paddy wagon hurts a lot more than having a bunch of people explain how dumb your opinion on transgender people is.
18 Likes
This.
Dawkins is the quintessential example of a guy who thinks he knows better than everyone else because he happens to be very knowledgeable in one area.
As for free speech, it’s pretty clear that it’s slowly fading in America. But has been the case for decades.
2 Likes
This basically nails it, except the “wealthy” part IMO. Shooting your mouth off with no consequence is a white privilege extended to poor whites as well, although of course rich people get away with even more. The essence of what you say is correct though, conservatives bitching about Freeze Peach are really complaining about loss of unearned privilege. Those same people enthusiastically support militarized police crushing political protests so thats about all you need to know about the depth of their commitment to free speech rights.
3 Likes
NBPAQing off.
10 Likes
Yeah but not the way conservatives think. They want to be able to say that blacks are inherently inferior without any pushback, which is not a free speech issue. The actual decline in free speech is directly attributable to the rise in fascist thinking, which is their preferred system.
3 Likes
“But why is it okay for black people to say the N-word if I can’t?”
5 Likes
Let’s have the conversation after the government actually regulates and enforces truth in advertising. Until that happens we have way too much ‘free speech’ already.
Being a sciencebro matters very little here.
3 Likes
I think I’ve shared this anecdote in @proudfather 's thread before, but will do so again. My understanding of transgenderism forever shifted when I talked to a then 6 year old trans girl and her father. Her father was sharing intimate details with me about his experience and said that his child expressed gender dysmorphia as early as age 2. By age 3 she was able to explain that it felt like the boy cells and the girl cells were at war in mommy’s tummy and the boy cells won on the outside but the girl cells won on the inside. That explanation coming from someone so young is more than enough for me to understand transgenderism.
I dont think Rachel Dolizar had the same biological inner war. Comparing the two is pretty disingenuous.
And to get back on topic, no.
6 Likes