Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall
Well no...there are most certainly instances where speech should be met with action. For example, if someone says, I'm going to attack you right now. You have a right to take action to stop that attack. You don't have to sit there and just take it.
Also, I most certainly never said that Iran's congress on holocaust denial was the only provocation. It was one of several mentioned.
Here's a question, how many missiles and bombs, either made or previously possessed by Iran, have struck Israel over the last 20 years?
|
It doesn’t matter if it was one of several. If you’re saying it was a provocation of military action, you’re saying it’s justified to bomb a country that hosts holocaust deniers.
Should we get to kill anyone who commits hate speech? What other kinds of speech do you think should be met with violence? Verbal threats aren’t actually recognized as a valid basis for preemptive strikes or for assaulting an individual, so I’m curious what forms of speech constitute your personal list for who should die?