PPEcel
cope and seethe
-
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2018
- Posts
- 29,087
Yes, this is protected speech.
Quite predictably, the kikes and the sand niggers are at it again. The Israelis are entitled, insufferable twats with a victimhood complex. “We’re just defending ourselves,” the Jews will say as they stuff their ungrateful mouths with U.S. aid dollars, despite being the vastly superior power. Not that the Palestinians are any better: They are retarded fucksticks who seem to think that launching the same shitty rockets over and over again will somehow lead to a different result the next time. Depending on who you ask, this renewed conflict is either a very good or a very bad thing. I now expect defense stocks to climb on Monday, despite the potential budgetary chaos in the now-speakerless U.S. House of Representatives. But I digress.
As emotions run high, free speech will be under attack. I am here to remind you, for those of you living in the United States, that the First Amendment protects “hate speech”. Unfortunately, r/IncelTears doesn’t seem to have gotten the message. A recent post, titled “Incels celebrating terrorism,” has triggered Redditors up in arms. The offending content? Incels on Blackpill.club mocking female IDF soldiers who were captured and are now presumably being raped and tortured by Hamas. One Redditor moans: “Their hate speech is out of control. Any other demographic being lambasted like this would be illegal in a lot of countries. So why is this being allowed to proliferate?”
Why wouldn’t this be allowed to proliferate? If this Redditor is American, he or she should try reading the Constitution for once. If this Redditor isn’t American, he or she shouldn’t operate with the expectation that everyone else lives in a cucked state with draconian speech codes (e.g. Canada). Here’s how many fucks the U.S. federal judiciary gives about hate speech laws in “a lot of [other] countries”: zero. From a legal standpoint, the speech highlighted on Blackpill.club doesn't constitute "incitement" nor "true threats"—terms that have very specific, narrowly-drawn legal definitions. It's not even close.
There is no recognized exception to the First Amendment that would allow the government to suppress speech that expresses enthusiasm for the rape, torture, and murder of female Israelis, whether combatants or civilians. Speech that justifies, defends, or even advocates for war and war crimes is legitimate political discourse, no matter how unpopular or unorthodox, and is entitled to the full protection of the United States Constitution.
Cry about it.
Last edited: