In light of the LARGE thread on Romney.....

[Duelist925]

No mind control, yet!!! Of course folks the right to be offended I wouldn't deny the right to disagree after I like to agree as well as disagree. I maintain that the offensive person shouldn't be hounded out of their job. So many folks aren't satisfied until they've destroyed someone they disagree with. Both the life and right are equally quilty. Anyone here can disagree me that likes, I don't care and I would never interfere with your job even if my life was threatened.

Better points for and against people losing their jobs have been brought up than I would have, so I'm not going to address this beyond my own opinion:

Once someone claims they work at a place, they become its mouthpiece. If they embarrass that company in an extreme way like this, its the companies prerogative to discipline them as they see fit.

I don't disagree but the fact is thousands of death threats are made every day and most are brushed aside as BS.

Most of them aren't directed to the President of the United States. Those tend to get taken a bit more seriously than most. Anyone who thinks they can get away with saying "the president should be killed, lol" without some serious damn consequences is, frankly, an idiot.

Where you as equally offended when I also used the words caucasian and asian??? I didn't use the word negro in a offensive manner, I used it as a race identifier. Just because someone is from the African continent doesn't mean they're of the negro race.

Whether or not it was used in an offensive manner, it is an offensive word to many.

Asian and caucasian lack the negative history that "negro" has.

I here we have to agree to disagree.

Again we'll have to agree to disagree. Her demeaning of her fellow Canadians is sometimes amusing.

Gravekeeper is one of the most intelligent commenters on this site, and one of the most entertaining on CS. There is no agree or disagree regarding the simple facts that he backs up his arguments with reasonable, well thought out, and logical points.

It does not matter whether or not you 'agree' with this statement or not--it is simple truth, and does not rely on your agreement to remain as such.

And frankly, you could stand to learn a few basics regarding debate.

I paint with no wider a brush that I'm painted with.

You are painted with your own brush. There is a difference.

[Panacea]

No mind control, yet!!! Of course folks the right to be offended I wouldn't deny the right to disagree after I like to agree as well as disagree. I maintain that the offensive person shouldn't be hounded out of their job.

And I actually agree with you on that part and have said so. But what you had to say involved more than just this one person:

"this again shows you can have any opinion you want just as long as it's PC."

And that's what I was talking about with mind control; you're free to think what you want. You're free to believe what you want. But you have to suck it up when you offend someone else. Your right to your own opinion is counter balanced by my right to call you out on it. You need to accept this fact; your continued failure to do this makes you look like a petulant child.

I don't disagree but the fact is thousands of death threats are made every day and most are brushed aside as BS.

Sure. And the Secret Service investigates every one they hear about, because that's their job.

Where you as equally offended when I also used the words caucasian and asian??? I didn't use the word negro in a offensive manner, I used it as a race identifier. Just because someone is from the African continent doesn't mean they're of the negro race.

Your meaning was clear; no one here was fooled. Do you think we're stupid?

Again we'll have to agree to disagree. Her demeaning of her fellow Canadians is sometimes amusing.

Him. GK is a guy. And he doesn't "demean" his fellow Canadians. He does poke fun at his country's shortcomings as much as we poke fun at hours.

I paint with no wider a brush that I'm painted with.

You don't get it. You are setting a double standard; calling out other people on behavior you perform yourself. The others here aren't saying one thing and doing another; you are.

[Hyena Dandy]

That's wast I remember from high school government.
I believe this is the law-
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/871

Now, I don't know that it applies to internet, there maybe a separate law for that.

That's a completely different thing.

There is no law against saying "I hope the president gets assassinated."

That could, however, lead someone to think that I want to take steps to make sure that happens. And thus, I'd be INVESTIGATED. But I can't be arrested and charged with HOPING the President gets assassinated.

[violiav]

I thought GK was female, as well.At first I thought GK was male, based on the name, then I saw people use the female pronoun. But hey, this is the interweb, who really knows who's on the other end?

[Nekojin]

I thought GK was female, as well.At first I thought GK was male, based on the name, then I saw people use the female pronoun. But hey, this is the interweb, who really knows who's on the other end?

This is the Internet, where men are men, women are men, children are FBI agents, and sheep are scared.

[AmbrosiaWriter]

This is the Internet, where men are men, women are men, children are FBI agents, and sheep are scared.

GIRL = Guy in real life

[siead_lietrathua]

Him. GK is a guy. And he doesn't "demean" his fellow Canadians. He does poke fun at his country's shortcomings as much as we poke fun at hours.

want to agree with this. i (as a canadian) have never found GK to be offensive or demeaning. GK! try HARDER! :P

and while you may not be arresting for saying you hope/ want the president to be assassinated... doesn't mean other people have to hang out with you. or hire you. or keep you as an employee, especially if it's an at-will-employment situation. if your boss can fire you for a difference of opinion on Cheetos, then they can fire you for being a dumbass.

[Fire_on_High]

and the seemingly unreasonable statements made by one poster

I'm unreasonable for voting my party's candidate when I disagree with the other candidate's policy? Sounds an awful lot like "Shut up, we don't need no stinking other opinions here!" to me.

Regardless, I voted for Romney precisely as I said I was going to, but Obama IS the president and bloody well should be protected accordingly. That means threats can't and shouldn't be tolerated.

I may disagree with his policy, but that doesn't mean I want anything to happen to him. Quite the opposite...I fear the chaos if anything ever did.

[Ginger Tea]

I don't think he meant you

[Duelist925]

I'm unreasonable for voting my party's candidate when I disagree with the other candidate's policy? Sounds an awful lot like "Shut up, we don't need no stinking other opinions here!" to me.

Regardless, I voted for Romney precisely as I said I was going to, but Obama IS the president and bloody well should be protected accordingly. That means threats can't and shouldn't be tolerated.

I may disagree with his policy, but that doesn't mean I want anything to happen to him. Quite the opposite...I fear the chaos if anything ever did.

I'm pretty positive he didn't mean you.

And while I voted for Obama, had Romney won I'd have much the same stance as you--agree or not, president is president. And damn, the chaos should anything happen...

[bex1218]

I'm unreasonable for voting my party's candidate when I disagree with the other candidate's policy? Sounds an awful lot like "Shut up, we don't need no stinking other opinions here!" to me.

Regardless, I voted for Romney precisely as I said I was going to, but Obama IS the president and bloody well should be protected accordingly. That means threats can't and shouldn't be tolerated.

I may disagree with his policy, but that doesn't mean I want anything to happen to him. Quite the opposite...I fear the chaos if anything ever did.

The most you said was "of course" and other threads you gave some reasoning. You were still more civil about it.

[Gravekeeper]

I appreciate the votes of confidence. The sex change I'm not so sure about. But I try to be open minded. I'll give it a week or two. See how it goes. -.-

[Rapscallion]

Might throw your balance off :/

Rapscallion

[wolfie]

OP mentioned a THREAD about Romney? Looks more like a rope to me.

I recall a good friend of mine who was investigated for allegedly threatening GHW Bush. The allegation came from the President of the Young Republicans Club, a total nut job who was mad because my friend had resulted in his getting fired from his job: he was the manager of the electronics dept of a retail store and YR got fired for being a slacker, and harassing the customers about politics at work.

The fact he was a nut didn't keep the SS from isolating my friend for over 24 hours of interrogation, refusing to allow him to call his wife or a lawyer. Once they figured out the caller was a nut, the SS then refused to apologize, and just kicked my friend loose.

WTF? Whatever happened to the right to an attorney, and the right to have that attorney present during questioning? Sounds like he was being kept incommunicado - in which case your use of "SS" as an abbreviation is more accurate than you may have intended.

Most of them aren't directed to the President of the United States. Those tend to get taken a bit more seriously than most. Anyone who thinks they can get away with saying "the president should be killed, lol" without some serious damn consequences is, frankly, an idiot.

Which is why, on another board years ago, when I posted a "guess which state doesn't belong" (with the criteria being "home to a living ex-president or not"), one clue I gave was that a state's inclusion on the list on July 4, 2176 would have no relationship to its inclusion on the list now - choosing a date so far in the future that for ANY living ex-president to still be alive then, they'd have to have broken the record for human longevity by over 100 years (and therefore it would be reasonable to assume that they wouldn't live to see that date, since it would be highly unlikely that ANYONE now living would live to see that date).

[Panacea]

WTF? Whatever happened to the right to an attorney, and the right to have that attorney present during questioning? Sounds like he was being kept incommunicado - in which case your use of "SS" as an abbreviation is more accurate than you may have intended.

He didn't understand his rights and was too intimidated to demand them.

I'd have been screaming lawyer from the get go, and refused to go anywhere with them unless they had a warrant.