3 thoughts on “Boo Hoo”

  1. However, he added that such “depends on context” and he “could be talked out of” his current view.

    In the spirit of civil experimentation and social science, we should completely follow-up on Professor’s Segall’s idea. In fact, instead of only two forms of practiced law, criminal and civil, we should add a third, contextual.

    You can be brought into contextual court on charges of contextual hate speech. The charge can only be brought if grounds can be given that the speech was given in a hateful context, regardless of what was actually said. Defense attorneys advocates can force an acquittal if they can convince a jury that the charge was brought out-of-context, esp. if the accused self identifies as a member of a class of people who cannot frame a context. For example, one could see people who suffer from Tourette’s Syndrome being hauled into context court for hate speech and then subsequently acquitted.

    A prime area of concern and much controversy is whether the doctrine of “without a context until proven dogmatic” should apply.

  2. He should be careful – the chains they forged in the Biden administration will still be here in the next conservative administration.

  3. ““In a sane world, which is most free countries on Earth, you just outlaw all threats,” said Segall”

    Are we sure this guy is an American?

    Do we get to outlaw commies and their Satan spawn offspring?

    The people who push transgressing norms as a way to destabilize society have thoughts about what is socially acceptable and it turns out their provocations toward the normals is OK but disagreeing with their totalitarian beliefs isn’t OK.

Comments are closed.