安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語（日文）
한국어（韓文）
ไทย（泰文）
Български（保加利亞文）
Čeština（捷克文）
Dansk（丹麥文）
Deutsch（德文）
English（英文）
Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希臘文）
Français（法文）
Italiano（義大利文）
Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語）
Magyar（匈牙利文）
Nederlands（荷蘭文）
Norsk（挪威文）
Polski（波蘭文）
Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙）
Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西）
Română（羅馬尼亞文）
Русский（俄文）
Suomi（芬蘭文）
Svenska（瑞典文）
Türkçe（土耳其文）
tiếng Việt（越南文）
Українська（烏克蘭文）
回報翻譯問題
討論區規矩與守則
檢舉此篇文章
True
"Yes, i ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ hate mal"
I in fact did make clear this this is happening outside the U.S. it was one of my starting points before mentioning this. as for the "War crimes thing," yeah that was trying to be smartass and clever by tying the concept of a "human right,"(Canada calls it as such) to the concept of a war crime, which was just disengenuous. The illegal still stands though.
Now let's talk about the legal example since it's interesting. Do you not see an serious problem here? If someone doesn't use the titles of an individual, they are now guilty of a hate-crime, and a strictly violence crime like murder can then be escalated purely if the defendant does not accept some other persons titles. Of course all of this is based on your interpretation to a .com publicly traded news sites and a google search, so you might as well have come to me with no quote at all and been just as well. New flash, find the actual law next time. That being said, I don't think it's "mysteria" to note a law enforcing compelled speech onto someone. It's a breach of the human right of freedom of speech so I'm not sure you justify that as hysteria.
"It's only ok when we do it"
One is serious, the other is trolling.
My bad then.
"It's only ok when we do it, if others do it then it's automatically trolling."
fixed.
Comply and obey!
NEIN !! Du kartofellsalat kopf will never catch me alive !
I might be willing to concede that you're a "people" socially (not legally - you don't & shouldn't get double votes) if you happen to have a disassociative mental condition, but otherwise, "peppermint hollows' -" question provided an opportune time to address where the majority of the opposition & concern comes from, beyond just the places where people are being intolerant or discriminatory (which some people are definitely just being intolerant / discriminatory too).
*Elevated, not escalated, there's a bit of a difference.
Anyways, there are other bases for defining a hate-crime.
I can understand if you just don't think that elevated charges for hate-crimes should exist at all, as that's a position about whether and how harsh law should be on crime.
As long as you aren't opposed to the concept of hate-crime charges, though, there needs to be ways to accurately define what hateful motive and hateful motivation is.
So to get to your question at the start of that point of yours :
I see a problem with people murdering each other.
I also see a BIGGER problem with people committing murders on the basis, or with the motive, to purge society of differences that they think "don't belong".
Unlike murder for reasons such as obtaining inheritance (greed), hate-motivated murders are quite literally in every sense someone "playing god" by deciding who lives and who dies, rather than simply killing to eliminate an obstacle to profit.
Unlike someone who simply murdered an obstacle to their objective, you can be certain that people who take it upon themselves to decide who has the right to live or not won't be satisfied or stop at just 1 person that they have decided does not have the right to live, and likely would even start a full-genocide if given the opportunity - not because the people being purged were an obstacle to obtaining some profit, but simply because they were deemed to be unworthy of human-rights. We've seen this happen before, unless you're going to deny that the holocaust happened too.
If you actually believe that, then the Canadian law is made up then, according to you?
Then it would seem you don't even have a reasonable concern for being penalized for compelled speech.
You can't even maintain consistent points that don't undermine your own position.
How about you do that instead of falsely relating things to war-crimes?
But you already admitted that you were being disingenous, so it should come as no surprise that you demand others cite legal statutes after making your own legal claims yet failing to cite the statute yourself.
Jawohl!
That's not what I call "talk" and misses the OP question by a lightyear, but never mind, formally you're correct, keep up with this level of "explanations".
Jesus.
It's nothing about force. It's just COURTESY.
That's the point. Why on earth do people get so bent out of shape to do something NICE for people especially when it doesn't hurt you in any way whatsoever? It's truly pathetic.
Please demonstrate how it ACUTALLY hurts you. What on earth is "♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ with the operational abilities of my lanauge"? How on earth is that a thing when anyone can simply do as they ask? You'll need to demosntrate evidence of this claim.
And also don't strawman me - I never said anything about gaslighting people so please stop being so silly.
The fact is if you meet someone and they right up front say something like "would you mind addressing me like this" what's wrong with that.
As I pointed out, it's no diffrerent to them saying "hey, my name is Simon, would you mind addressing me like that".
It's just the good old neo-Marxist fascists (whatever that would even mean) clearly taking away our freedom, soon we'll all live under totalitarian governments just because of this thing alone, because it's totally required by law to refer to someone how they want you to and it's obviously illegal to refer to them any other way, that's why you got people on this forum using wrong labels on purpose and absolutely nothing has happened to them. Nothing. At all. Sounds exactly like North Korea to me, we're all doomed.