^^^^^^^^^^

IT IS LITERALLY

Moving the goalposts now.

Count Dankula was convicted over words alone

A DEED

NOT A WORD

Deeds are speech <:pot_of_kek:544849795433496586>

Ok, If it is passed through Parliament it becomes statute law and the courts have to apply it

Your supreme court agrees it is

once again the goalposts have shifted

We just need one bill proclaiming Hate Speech to be Free Speech and we are fine

By you, sure.

An action that doesn't physically affect anyone is basically speech

you have literally shifted the goalposts from freedom of speech to crimerates

Burning a Cross is different to being arrested over words alone

"Instead, the Supreme Court has chosen to impose narrowly tailored limits on speech that is regarded as hateful"

There you have it.

Even the supreme court agrees there are limits on your speech and that there are hate speech limitations.

<a:clapping:597808588286722053>

then when you came back to freedom of speech, you used an example that was convicted based on cross burning, which is an action

Shall we continue?

Again still Freer then the UK

2.1 million people in prison

Sorry, it's not buddy

In terms of Free Speech

that is obsurd

I will admit you found a case of it

But how often does that occur compared to the UK

It is, he's a libertarian. @Sillius Soddus

What do you expect?

'' The most precious possession you have in the world is your own people. ''

Partially

I'd say burning a cross is roughly the same as getting a dog to do a Nazi salute

No

Not even close

Haha

Although both should be allowed

How is it different?

I can't wait to see this mental gymnastics.

If it's considered threatening, that is just someone's personal perception

One is presumably done outside whereas the dog is in the privacy of your own home for one