Assuming that story is true, that’s an excellent point. I guess I react strongly in this nazi-punch case because I’m a 1st-amendment absolutist.
It’s okay to oppose some things at the level of thought.
Based on our earlier exchanges and on other ones with “First Amendment absolutists” I can’t say I’m all that surprised you describe yourself as such (the ACLU, being attorneys and Constitutional scholars, would not describe themselves that way).
Before you attempt to further blow our minds with your unique insights let me suggest you spend some time reviewing this thread:
problem is…the First Amendment is NOT absolute. You cannot simply say anything you want in any manner you want at any time you want in any situation you want. There are consequences to words and speech…always.
Right in the fuhrer’s face?
I’m a stealing that!
Get in line: I already downloaded it.
Whereas many of us are anti-Nazi absolutists.
True but we shouldn’t have to kill our way through getting rid of MAGAts like we did with Nazis. The system will take care of them. Trump will end up dead of a stroke, impeached, resigned or in prison.
A Nazi armband is worn specifically to provoke violence and anger in those who see it. MAGA hats have not come close to that level of provocation…yet.
Plus one should pick their battles. There are far fewer dolts stupid enough to wear a Nazi armband than there are those who wear MAGA hats. Easier targets. More realistic targets.
Honey, if you are calling me hateful slurs in hope of picking a fight I’m more than happy to oblige.
The guy WAS fishing for a fight. He wasn’t just parading around with a hate symbol in an armband an taking care of his own business, he was actively provoking people until he annoyed the wrong person enough then was all “wait wait I was joking”.
Pray tell me exactly what you think you are defending here? Because there’s NOTHING about that behavior that is remotely acceptable.
Good for you. If a stranger in the street is calling me names in hope of starting a fight I’m exercising my right to deck them in the face. They can exercise their right to offend and I can exercise my right to answer and defend my honor. Deal?
I’m all for the punching, but it is worrying how deftly these types can take an incident like this and portray it as a rhetorical victory to their supporters. You know how it goes: “Help! I’m being oppressed by liberals!”
I imagine some decent Weimar-era Germans punched Nazis?
I lose a lot of sleep over how to effectively oppose this bullshit, versus opposing it in a way that just feels good. But sometimes feeling good is good enough.
Apparently everyone from Facebook to subway commuters are now vested government authorities, because that’s what the First Amendment covers it’s not as if dingbats would mistake their ability to shitpost on social media with their legal protection from government censorship. I mean who could possibly be that dumb?
I don’t mean this in any way other than morbid curiosity, so please don’t take it as an insult. What is your 1st amendment absolutist view of sexual harassment? More specifically, I mean a person using only their capacity for free expression to harm someone in a completely non-physical way? How about blackmail and extortion, which also exploit free expression in entirely non-physical ways which we have also deemed illegal?
Looks like the pissed more than Joey. Who could have imagined?