this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2024
-17 points (28.2% liked)

Conservative

461 readers
490 users here now

A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff

  1. Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.

  2. We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.

  3. Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.

A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.

founded 1 year ago
all 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] saltesc 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

A man was convicted for sending a tweet while drunk referring to dead soldiers. Another was arrested for an anti-police t-shirt. Another was arrested for calling the Irish boyfriend of his ex-girlfriend a “leprechaun.” Yet another was arrested for singing “Kung Fu Fighting.” A teenager was arrested for protesting outside of a Scientology center with a sign calling the religion a “cult.” Last year, Nicholas Brock, 52, was convicted of a thought crime in Maidenhead, Berkshire. The neo-Nazi was given a four-year sentence for what the court called his “toxic ideology” based on the contents of the home he shared with his mother in Maidenhead, Berkshire.

Yeah, none of that is justified. Whether religion, opinion, or ideology, it's your duty to protect everyone's right to them, just as it's your duty to prevent people taking harmful action with them—like any other scenario. There's a big difference in two people yelling their opinions back and forth at each other, and someone planning or insighting crime onto the other because of it. That's why the street preacher can feel as safe as the guy walking past with 666 tattooed on their forehead. They're expressing themselves, not harming anyone, whether their opinion is popular or not.

[–] MapleEngineer 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

As in the US "free speech" is a white supremacist code word for hate speech.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

And what happens when people you don't like are in power and start censoring you?

[–] WhatYouNeed 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You vote. And you make sure you're voting for someone that won't try to fuck over society for their own benefit.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

So how many elections do think you can guarantee that you won't have someone who might do something with that power you won't like?

[–] WhatYouNeed 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You can't guarantee. But you can look at a candidates statements and the history of the party they represent, to get an understanding of what will happen.

When one candidate says "I'll only be a dictator for one day" and his party doesn't react to this statement, that's a pretty big red flag that your civil rights will be severely eroded if they get into power.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

So what happens when people vote for someone you don't like?

[–] DarkDecay 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] -4 points 5 months ago

What would that accomplish?

[–] WhatYouNeed 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm not upset when someone uses their democratic right to vote for the person they want.

I'm more upset that we live in a society where people see a person that wants to take away their democratic rights and thinks "Yup, that's the one for me".