UK pub with sign saying fuck off to muslims

[peacewithoutgod]

Wrong. Not all speech is protected.

Didn't I cover what isn't protected? Other than making outright threats, or inciting a crowd to riot, the 1st Amendment covers it all. I don't see how these stipulations cover the sign in question, when posted in a private business. It's not even discrimination, being not about whether they would serve anyone who appears to be Muslim.

Violation of a contract agreement can be pursued when the contract was signed under your consent.

You cannot disclose government secrets either, but this stipulation is under scrutiny now by many Americans in the case of whistle-blowers like Edward Snowden.

So far, it's me who listed four examples, and you zero. Now it's late, and you probably need sleep too. I'll check your response when I have time tomorrow.

[Shiranu]

Didn't I cover what isn't protected?

You did. But since speech clearly is not "objectively" free, then that line of what can and cant be said is therefor subjective. And believe it or not, but the government sometimes bends the rules if it feels it has a reason (justifiably or not) to. Hate speech falls under that, and likewise what the government does or doesn't consider hateful. And private property or not, if the government didn't like it, it has the right to pull it/punish for it.

Ultimately this and your four examples are all irrelevant because I have never said the government should or shouldn't ban this speech. Personally I don't think they should; I think people should be smart enough not to post such filth on their own. What I DID say was that it is loaded with xenophobia and is the exact same bullshit that my ancestors went through, and that it IS intended to stoke the fire of, "YEAH! Dem' immigrants are ruinin' everything!".

It's posted at a bar, where no Muslim is going to see it... and you think this is intended as a message to Muslims? More specifically, a message to radical Muslims who want to install Sharia Law and enforce their way of life upon you? No? Then who do you think it is a message to?

-Who exactly do you think the intended audience was for the author?
-What senses, pathos or logos, do you think he was appealing to?
-(Spoiler for question 3) since it is an argument of pathos, what emotions was he trying to invoke in his audience?
-What do you think his objective was?
-What makes it any different from what my ancestors (just change "Radical Islam" to "Roman Catholic Communists and Anarchists" ) went through(minus the public lynchings)?

I'm sorry, I just don't buy this bullshit of, "I'm an atheist, therefor anything religion does is inherently wrong and anything that critcises it is inherently right!", especially when the argument has nothing to do with the religion at hand but rather a super-small percentage of a super-small population that is supposedly going to destroy your way of life. This has fuck all to do with Islam, and everything to do with, "The OTHERS are coming to destroy our way of life!".

[FaithIsFilth]

Muslims go to bars plenty I would think. The 9/11 hijackers were partying it up at the strip club. The guy who just killed those Marines was a drug addict or an alcoholic. IS kills it's members regularly for using drugs or smoking or whatever. Muslims "sin" just like everyone else.

[Shiranu]

Muslims go to bars plenty I would think. The 9/11 hijackers were partying it up at the strip club. The guy who just killed those Marines was a drug addict or an alcoholic. IS kills it's members regularly for using drugs or smoking or whatever. Muslims "sin" just like everyone else.

Right, I'll let yall two sort out if they go to bars are not, and ask my questions accordingly from there.

[Hakurei Reimu]

Does the person who put up the sign know that Muslims aren't supposed to go to bars?

[peacewithoutgod]

Hate speech falls under that, and likewise what the government does or doesn't consider hateful. And private property or not, if the government didn't like it, it has the right to pull it/punish for it.

You may have conflated hate speech with hate crime legislation, not the same. Speech isn't a crime, and the government of the US has no right to punish anyone for what they say about people in other groups. If it did, then the KKK would be just a bad memory.

It's posted at a bar, where no Muslim is going to see it... and you think this is intended as a message to Muslims? More specifically, a message to radical Muslims who want to install Sharia Law and enforce their way of life upon you? No? Then who do you think it is a message to?

-Who exactly do you think the intended audience was for the author?
-What senses, pathos or logos, do you think he was appealing to?
-(Spoiler for question 3) since it is an argument of pathos, what emotions was he trying to invoke in his audience?
-What do you think his objective was?
-What makes it any different from what my ancestors (just change "Radical Islam" to "Roman Catholic Communists and Anarchists" ) went through(minus the public lynchings)?

It is, first and foremost, in a place for entertainment, and it is solicitous to the anticipated and pre-existing sentiment (no more) of the crowd which is served there.

It is no different from what the KKK states in the public square today on blacks. If you happen to be a black American, then you already know worse with the KKK, which is also saying what the US cannot jail them for. Unlike American blacks, who made no choice regarding their presence in the US, the country to which you immigrate is your own choice.

Don't read into this, but I do happen to be the descendant of immigrants who believed in the "when in Rome.." cultural immigration philosophy, and it actually worked for for this group, which arrived in a land that said for decades "No Irish Need Apply".

[Ace101]

Fact is regardless of the "true" interpretation of Islam or any religion, not every member of the religion openly adheres to extremist beliefs even if that makes them "hypocrites".

So I'd say there's no reason to mention "Muslims" as a whole other than to be a dick.

Like Islam or not, if someone believes that "every Muslim" is secretly plotting a theocracy and simply not openly admitting it due to the "takkyah" or something then that's a conspiracy theory worthy of a tin foil hat. It'd be the same as suggesting that every Christian is secretly plotting to stone gays and bring back heretic burnings.

But truth is not every individual Christian or Muslim is actually doing that in practice even if that is the "true interpretation" of their religion - in that case it just makes them hypocrites, but I'd rather have a peaceful hypocrite than a terrorist who's "true to their faith" myself.

[peacewithoutgod]

Fact is regardless of the "true" interpretation of Islam or any religion, not every member of the religion openly adheres to extremist beliefs even if that makes them "hypocrites".

So I'd say there's no reason to mention "Muslims" as a whole other than to be a dick.

Like Islam or not, if someone believes that "every Muslim" is secretly plotting a theocracy and simply not openly admitting it due to the "takkyah" or something then that's a conspiracy theory worthy of a tin foil hat. It'd be the same as suggesting that every Christian is secretly plotting to stone gays and bring back heretic burnings.

But truth is not every individual Christian or Muslim is actually doing that in practice even if that is the "true interpretation" of their religion - in that case it just makes them hypocrites, but I'd rather have a peaceful hypocrite than a terrorist who's "true to their faith" myself.

I couldn't really care less if Muslims are "plotting a theocracy", every one of them is a problem if they have access to children.

[Ace101]

I couldn't really care less if Muslims are "plotting a theocracy", every one of them is a problem if they have access to children.

I'd say that while even a moderate Muslim's beliefs might have some bad influence on children, it isn't arguably "worse" just because "they're a Muslim" than the influence which other forms of bad parenting have.

So focusing exclusively on "Muslims" is just misguided anger. If a Muslim believes in Allah in the privacy of his own home, that's not a battle I'll pick - it's only when his belief turns into action that I'll take a stand against him.