The BNP - Good or Bad?

[Ardemax]

How can I make this anymore clearer?

I would not like it but I would accept that I live in a democracy and people have a right to freedom of speech.

Wrong, laughing at a funeral is not the same as believing the holocaust was exaggerated.

Do not imply that others on this forum are undemocratic, you support the European Union and want holocaust denial to be made illegal, so you are not in a very strong position when it comes to democracy.

The European Union is an insult to democracy, yes. What is your point?
I shall say it again;I would care, but as I live in a democracy I would also accept that people have different views to mine.

No you wouldn't accept people have different views about your family members' death. As far as anyone would care, someone saying it was all bogus and a fake, would you honestly go: "Thanks for your valid opinion, I'll value it and I'll say thankyou to democracy for letting this ******** give me nothing but nonsense." ... ok maybe not that harsh.

What is my point? Read the next bit of my question.

I was being ironic with the democratic thing, as you and mr. sergio have been saying how undemocratic I was, and then for him to tell me to give up this debate...
In this next bit, I'm hoping you can prove me wrong.

Your idea of freedom of speech is: everyone is allowed their opinion on something... sounds good.

Ok, so can I go up to you, insult you, insult your friends, tell them what I think of them in a nasty way and then when they complain I'll say it was freedom of speech and the case is dropped.

Mhmm?

[Seatherny]

So the person Nick Griffin took to court for apprarently racially abusing him should be found not guilty as its FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

[Ardemax]

So the person Nick Griffin took to court for apprarently racially abusing him should be found not guilty as its FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

Yes, exactly.

Freedom of speech can be used in any arguement!

[-:Undertaker:-]

No you wouldn't accept people have different views about your family members' death. As far as anyone would care, someone saying it was all bogus and a fake, would you honestly go: "Thanks for your valid opinion, I'll value it and I'll say thankyou to democracy for letting this ******** give me nothing but nonsense." ... ok maybe not that harsh.

I don't like everything people say, but I accept their right to say it. Do not tell me what I would and would not accept, maybe you would prefer everyone to be wrapped in EU/Govt cotton wool but I don't and neither do the rest of this country.

What is my point? Read the next bit of my question.

I was being ironic with the democratic thing, as you and mr. sergio have been saying how undemocratic I was, and then for him to tell me to give up this debate...
In this next bit, I'm hoping you can prove me wrong.

You are undemocratic.

Your idea of freedom of speech is: everyone is allowed their opinion on something... sounds good.

Ok, so can I go up to you, insult you, insult your friends, tell them what I think of them in a nasty way and then when they complain I'll say it was freedom of speech and the case is dropped.

Mhmm?

I never said everyone would be allowed to say what they felt, I have said clearly before that there is a line between racism/homophobia and so on which should not be crossed. As I state again further down in this post; homophobia and racism are not the same as denial of a historical event.

So the person Nick Griffin took to court for apprarently racially abusing him should be found not guilty as its FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

We are going around in circles yet again because I think you can see our point but are determined to keep repeating the same old lines which we have already debuckled. I have said before and i'll bold it for you this time, homophobia and racism are not the same as denial of a historical event.

[Ardemax]

I don't like everything people say, but I accept their right to say it. Do not tell me what I would and would not accept, maybe you would prefer everyone to be wrapped in EU/Govt cotton wool but I don't and neither do the rest of this country.

You are undemocratic.

I never said everyone would be allowed to say what they felt, I have said clearly before that there is a line between racism/homophobia and so on which should not be crossed. As I state again further down in this post; homophobia and racism are not the same as denial of a historical event.



We are going around in circles yet again because I think you can see our point but are determined to keep repeating the same old lines which we have already debuckled. I have said before and i'll bold it for you this time, homophobia and racism are not the same as denial of a historical event.

Actually denial of MLK and what he did could be seen as racist.

I'm so undemocratic it hurts.

So the only time when freedom of speech is stopped as soon as racism comes into play?

But I've only insulted someone? They're not gay, nor a different skin colour to me. That's still freedom of speech?

[Shockwave.2CC]

Good for some of it end of

[-:Undertaker:-]

Actually denial of MLK and what he did could be seen as racist.

I'm so undemocratic it hurts.

So the only time when freedom of speech is stopped as soon as racism comes into play?

But I've only insulted someone? They're not gay, nor a different skin colour to me. That's still freedom of speech?

How is denial of Martin Luther King racist? - I view Nelson Mandela as a terrorist as the ANC was a terrorist organisation using the most horrific methods of torture/killing in the Union of South Africa - am I racist?

..and yes, denial of the holocaust is not targeting somebody in a hateful manner, it is merely questioning whether or not it was a conspiracy by the Allied Powers.

[Black_Apalachi]

So the person Nick Griffin took to court for apprarently racially abusing him should be found not guilty as its FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, NOOOOOO!!!! :eusa_wall:eusa_wall:eusa_wall

... We are going around in circles yet again because I think you can see our point but are determined to keep repeating the same old lines which we have already debuckled. I have said before and i'll bold it for you this time, homophobia and racism are not the same as denial of a historical event.

Exactly what Dan said. You just keep repeating the same nonsense page after page and won't accept the definitive answer. There's no point trying to reason with you, enjoy your pointless post counts.

[Ardemax]

How is denial of Martin Luther King racist? - I view Nelson Mandela as a terrorist as the ANC was a terrorist organisation using the most horrific methods of torture/killing in the Union of South Africa - am I racist?

..and yes, denial of the holocaust is not targeting somebody in a hateful manner, it is merely questioning whether or not it was a conspiracy by the Allied Powers.

I still can't believe someone would deny all that evidence and proof. meh.
ok lemme quote from my other post

"So the only time when freedom of speech is stopped as soon as racism comes into play?

But I've only insulted someone? They're not gay, nor a different skin colour to me. That's still freedom of speech?"

....

[Seatherny]

I still can't believe someone would deny all that evidence and proof. meh.
ok lemme quote from my other post

"So the only time when freedom of speech is stopped as soon as racism comes into play?

But I've only insulted someone? They're not gay, nor a different skin colour to me. That's still freedom of speech?"

....

Exactly. Denying the holocaust causes hatred and causes sadness etc for the victims families. Thats our point. If the other two don't get it then "/ and they say we are enjoying pointless post counts "/.
To me, undertaker says something, we prove him wrong, and then he says thats not what he meant. He is just full of excuses and hence I am losing interest in this debate as he is one of those people who never accept they are wrong.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH SHOULD NOT BE LIMITED
gets proved wrong
WAIT THATS NOT WHAT I MEANT, I MEANT IT SHOULD BE LIMITED FOR PURPOSES OF HATRED ETC
gets proved wrong about BNP again
WAIT IT SHOULD ONLY BE FOR RACIAL ABUSE
gets proved wrong

whats next undertaker?