- Joined
- Jan 10, 2009
- Messages
- 42,744
- Reaction score
- 22,569
- Location
- Bonners Ferry ID USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
18. Hate Messages - Hate Messages delivered via threads, posts, signatures, or PM's are forbidden at Debate Politics. The Moderator Team defines a hate message as one of the following towards a “protected group” or a message aimed at an individual based on their identity in a “protected group”:
A) The support for or a call for violence.
B) The suggestion of removal of essential civil liberties.
C) Claims of severe dehumanization.
D) Claims of illegal behavior across the entire group.
Protected groups are:
a) Race.
b) Ethnicity.
c) Religion (also atheists).
d) Sexual orientation (including the transgendered).
e) National origin.
f) Gender.
g) Disability.
Yup, so if you support, say, gun control, then you are subject to moderator action because you are 'suggesting the removal of essential civil liberties' (the second amendment) from a 'national origin' (Americans).From the update forum rules :
That sure seems awfully open ended there. Is there anyway to close it up a bit? Because frankly the way this rule is written at least half of the people here at DP could be infracted under the way this is worded. Even the way that it is worded could be construed as a violation of the rule itself. Ex: d) Sexual orientation (including the transgendered).: Transgendered is being "included" as if the writer only added it because they were forced to and considers it a separate group that doesn't actually have anything to do with sexual orientation.
Yup, so if you support, say, gun control, then you are subject to moderator action because you are 'suggesting the removal of essential civil liberties' (the second amendment) from a 'national origin' (Americans).
Protected groups are:
a) Race.
b) Ethnicity.
c) Religion (also atheists).
d) Sexual orientation (including the transgendered).
e) National origin.
f) Gender.
g) Disability.
Another example is to oppose SSM in a state where it's already legal, because that's 'suggesting the removal of essential civil liberties' from a 'gender' AND 'sexual orientation'.That is one of the many examples that popped into my mind when I read the rule.
What jumped out at me is the fact that of the protected groups, one is something that is entirely voluntary rather than innate.
Having a protected group based upon nothing but religious ideology seems thought out very poorly.
What jumped out at me is the fact that of the protected groups, one is something that is entirely voluntary rather than innate.
Having a protected group based upon nothing but religious ideology seems thought out very poorly.
Some people are more equal than others.The idea of protested classes is stupid no matter what.
Some people are more equal than others.
That is exactly what it is.It always come off as a "I'm to much of a baby to made fun of" kind of thing to me.
Another example is to oppose SSM in a state where it's already legal, because that's 'suggesting the removal of essential civil liberties' from a 'gender' AND 'sexual orientation'.
Same thing for opposing abortion.
1. There was already a debate about this along time ago.
2. On the second list:
Shouldn't "(including the transgendered)" be under "f) Gender.", not "d) Sexual orientation."?
Yup, can't advocate anyone defending themselves against a home invasion anymore...or defending themselves in any way, because defense is violence.Another example is when people call for overthrowing governmental tyranny...something which the US happens to have been founded on."A) The support for or a call for violence." and in this case even the "support" for such a call could land one in trouble.
Yup, so if you support, say, gun control, then you are subject to moderator action because you are 'suggesting the removal of essential civil liberties' (the second amendment) from a 'national origin' (Americans).
National Origin is a protected group.No. If you say that "all Jews should have any weapons that they own, confiscated", that would apply. Being just for gun control does not. No protected group is identified.
The idea of protested classes is stupid no matter what.
National Origin is a protected group.
This is a political site and your new rules basically make all political opinions of every kind forbidden.
That is exactly what it is.
The 14th was written to give recently freed slaves citizenship. When did the civil war become about gays sharing insurance policies?
Your opinion is noted. And the rule remains.
From the update forum rules :
That sure seems awefully open ended there. Is there anyway to close it up a bit? Because frankly the way this rule is written at least half of the people here at DP could be infracted under the way this is worded. Even the way that it is worded could be construed as a violation of the rule itself. Ex: d) Sexual orientation (including the transgendered).: Transgendered is being "included" as if the writer only added it because they were forced to and considers it a seperate group that doesn't actually have anything to do with sexual orientation.
That doesn't make it any less stupid.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?