Quote:

I am not sure how you support "free speech" and anti-censorship by trying to silence Hawgly from expressing his opinion (ha, ha).


but I DIDN'T forbidhis opinion. In the spirit of free dialogue, I merely offered an opposing point of view

Quote:

By the way, first amendment rights don't really apply here on this privately owned message board.


1st amendment rights aren't the point of this discussion. Did I say anything about 1st amendment rights? No, I didnm't. Your objection is a classic example of turning the discussion into a different question altogether in order to mmuddy the logic.

My point is repeatedly over and over in all of these discussions that when you start repressing what people can say and where they can say it, it doesn't change extreme attitudes, it only sends them underground looking for another way to vent. In my opinion, those who push for the silence of another point of view believe that point of view has more credibility than their own, and so they want to limit what others can hear to include only what the stifler likes to hear. It is a form of thought control and that is not a good thing.

Please read the book I mentioned then come back with your thoughts.

By the way, I understand that you are not a lone in your thinking, and that all points of view should have a means of expression. I'm glad you speak up. Dialog is good. Repression, not so much.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ey71h8ep047758h/AAC12jNM0Hz9Q8zsh5iDeqNHa?dl=0