• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Armband-wearing Nazi roams Seattle instigating, gets KOed, removes armband and leaves

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tbf, they lost their right in my eyes, the moment they thought a Swastika was something they identified with. Murder or no, they and their hatred are never to be tolerated.

Well of course, they always never had a right. But I am saying recently they are no longer allowed a platform. American society gave them one and they committed terrorism. So now that most of rational people's argument is valid for punching one, there should be no discussion.
 
I mean, taking the position that A: Nazism is a political position and that B: violence should never be directed at people for a political position, is basically saying that civilians should never under any circumstance overthrow a government for its politics. It's saying civil war is always wrong.

This guy went around telling people that America should only be a country for white people of European decent. That continued no matter what arguments were presented to him, until he got punched. That stopped it.

I shouldn't take some pleasure from that?
 

D i Z

Member
Yes.
Hate speech should not be tolerated. At all.

So when Nazi's and white supremacists are straight up killing people whenever they choose in this country and enjoying the protections from the system as the world turns a blind eye to it year after year, day after day, is our democratic state in jeopardy then?
 

blackflag

Member
so have these neo nazis been some sorta underground thing until the past year or something? I mean i hear stuff about this from time to time but it seems to be pretty blown out recently or is this just the media paying more attention to it now?

that was a clean KO. kinda wish I would see more of those in the UFC lol

Trump and his deplorable supporters emboldened them. We need to show them that they are not safe.
 
One doesn't involve mob justice.
We either live in a democratic state or we don't. We can't close our eyes to the judicial system whenever it suits us.

By the way, not American. It's harder for you since you do not trust your police, and since most of them are equally racist.

That doesn't answer either of my questions. And I'm not American either ;)
 
I was - I have been demodded as a knee-jerk reaction to someone not understanding my point, or not being able to tolerate it. That's fine with me. Anyone who knows me or has read anything I've posted in the past knows that I am not in any way a Nazi sympathiser or apologist. I am, however, a big believer in justice, and that means that I'm going to be against vigilante violence, whether it's against Nazis or not, and whether it's by police, random bystanders or Batman himself.

I thought long and hard before using those words (and before posting in this thread at all), and I did it because what matters isn't necessarily what you or I think about the legitimacy of their position. What matters is that someone has set themselves up as judge, jury and potentially executor in this case. And whether they're right or not is irrelevant. Because if they can set themselves up in that way, even for a righteous cause, other people with differing viewpoints can and will as well. You hate Nazis, right? Of course you do. All right-thinking people do. But there are people who believe that other positions are just as bad. And while it's easy to say that these people are wrong, that doesn't take away from the fact that they believe they're not, with just as much fervour as you believe that Nazis are wrong. And if this punch is justified, then they can feel justified in taking the same approach.

This isn't moral relativism. I'm not saying at any level that these positions are equivalent. What I believe doesn't matter in any of this - what matters is the belief of the people throwing the punch, or swinging the axe, or pulling the trigger, or whatever action they believe is justified.

In fact the way you get rid of moral relativism from the equation is by saying that no, the decision is not one to be taken by individuals; it's to be taken by a firmly established law. Yes, I understand a lot of why this doesn't always happen in the US. That doesn't mean that the 'right' approach is to turn to vigilante violence, though. I can see why it's tempting, and I can understand why people do it and support it (and even why there's a mob reaction against everyone who rejects it). But I can't condone it.

And for everyone criticising me for using the phrase 'political position' to describe Nazism, would you not describe it as an extreme right-wing ideology? Because that's the language of politics. Placing it outside that sometimes is a dangerous move, because it treats it like it's some kind of special case, and it isn't. It's an example of the worst one of the most unpleasant extremes in politics has to offer, and treating it as something separate makes it more difficult to say that other positions in the same part of the political spectrum have many aspects that are just as bad.

The problem is that you don't believe in justice, because if you did, you'd be celebrating this just as much as the rest of us mostly are. You want to know how I know that?

Because whatever the fuck we've got going on right now isn't "justice." It's "Order." "Law." When Nazis walk down the street harassing people openly with otherwise no repercussions, that isn't "justice." When the law protects the unjust, murderers by every other name, in the name of order or the thin blue line while unarmed black men are choked out for selling a loosey while black, or a black man is gunned down in front of his family for parking while black, or a surrendering black man is beaten for surrendering while black, or police are up in arms and devoting most of their resources to people who EXIST while black, ignoring the crime that happens on the other "side" of the melanin count, when "justice" is served by penalizing black men and women more harshly than white men and women, and when they protest, desperately and peacefully, they're considered thugs, or "the REAL racists" or words I'll never repeat despite my family, in their safest of safe zones, spouting it daily because they think they can get away with it (and do get away with it), there is no justice.

When LGBT youth are booted out of their homes, the only ones they've ever known, by the only people they've ever trusted, to live on the streets or be forced into sex work to survive, or when the entire proto-pogrom that has become the Republican Party treats US like we're less than people, like we deserve no rights, like we should be shamed, locked away, never talked about, and ignored, there is no justice.

When your entire justice system not only allows but propagates this, when your entire justice system ignores its effects but is all ears for its suggestions, there is no justice. Not unless it's taken by force.

"Believer" in "justice," how is any of this just?

We are judge, jury, and executioner because the judges, juries, and executioners refuse, on purpose or by mistake, to dole out justice.
 

jabuseika

Member
I was - I have been demodded as a knee-jerk reaction to someone not understanding my point, or not being able to tolerate it. That's fine with me. Anyone who knows me or has read anything I've posted in the past knows that I am not in any way a Nazi sympathiser or apologist. I am, however, a big believer in justice, and that means that I'm going to be against vigilante violence, whether it's against Nazis or not, and whether it's by police, random bystanders or Batman himself.


No tolerance for the intolerant.

That flag represents something, and he knew damn well what that is.

He wore violence and hate on his sleeve to a black community. Justice? what we witnessed was justice.
 

ZeoVGM

Banned
I just need to say, the mods here have had their work cut out for them since the election and they've done a great job.

Clearly, everyone will disagree with a decision a mod makes at some point. That's natural. But between threads like this and the PewDiePie threads over in gaming, they've made it very clear where GAF stands on certain issues that truly should not ever be up for debate.

It's nice to see that in an internet landscape filled with your wishy-washy take-no-action sites like Reddit and Twitter.

Kudos.
 
I thought that's what Bish was accused of doing :p

(side talk: I still don't like a lot of the violence in that movie, particularly when they beat the Nazi soldier in Chapter 2; the tone and writing just seem at odds with the framing and filmmaking by Tarantino)

It's so strange that in this thread we've seen someone bring up Nazi toddlers, equivocate Naziism to just a political ideology that is disagreeable (which, maybe you can make that point semantically, but come on...), and saying using Nazi symbolism is nuanced. I mean, I can understand someone saying violence is never the answer, but the above is just bizarre and frightening.

Funny thing is Nazi children and not generalising against hate groups that use Nazi symbols was by the same person, SummitAve. Dude was working overtime!
 

Emerson

May contain jokes =>
All actions have consequences. If somebody wants to wear a fucking Swastika in public in 2017 and exercise his right to free speech, he can. And if he gets the shit beaten out of him, that's not censorship, it's being held accountable for your behavior.

Assault is a crime, and the person who hit him may well be punished. If they are, they should wear that as a badge of honor that they did the morally right thing even if it wasn't the legal thing. I wouldn't agree with the idea of a government dictating which individual groups are okay to assault and which aren't.

Personally I'd still feel much more sorry for the puncher than the Nazi.
 
I was - I have been demodded as a knee-jerk reaction to someone not understanding my point, or not being able to tolerate it. That's fine with me. Anyone who knows me or has read anything I've posted in the past knows that I am not in any way a Nazi sympathiser or apologist. I am, however, a big believer in justice, and that means that I'm going to be against vigilante violence, whether it's against Nazis or not, and whether it's by police, random bystanders or Batman himself.

I thought long and hard before using those words (and before posting in this thread at all), and I did it because what matters isn't necessarily what you or I think about the legitimacy of their position. What matters is that someone has set themselves up as judge, jury and potentially executor in this case. And whether they're right or not is irrelevant. Because if they can set themselves up in that way, even for a righteous cause, other people with differing viewpoints can and will as well. You hate Nazis, right? Of course you do. All right-thinking people do. But there are people who believe that other positions are just as bad. And while it's easy to say that these people are wrong, that doesn't take away from the fact that they believe they're not, with just as much fervour as you believe that Nazis are wrong. And if this punch is justified, then they can feel justified in taking the same approach.

This isn't moral relativism. I'm not saying at any level that these positions are equivalent. What I believe doesn't matter in any of this - what matters is the belief of the people throwing the punch, or swinging the axe, or pulling the trigger, or whatever action they believe is justified.

In fact the way you get rid of moral relativism from the equation is by saying that no, the decision is not one to be taken by individuals; it's to be taken by a firmly established law. Yes, I understand a lot of why this doesn't always happen in the US. That doesn't mean that the 'right' approach is to turn to vigilante violence, though. I can see why it's tempting, and I can understand why people do it and support it (and even why there's a mob reaction against everyone who rejects it). But I can't condone it.

And for everyone criticising me for using the phrase 'political position' to describe Nazism, would you not describe it as an extreme right-wing ideology? Because that's the language of politics. Placing it outside that sometimes is a dangerous move, because it treats it like it's some kind of special case, and it isn't. It's an example of the worst one of the most unpleasant extremes in politics has to offer, and treating it as something separate makes it more difficult to say that other positions in the same part of the political spectrum have many aspects that are just as bad.

The people who need this as an excuse to commit violence don't exist. Nazis are inherently violent from their worldview already, direct or indirect, it doesn't matter. Nobody is going to get punched because of this because someone thought moderate conservatives are just as bad, and if they did, almost nobody would support them. Or any other kind of equation. Because it's common knowledge just how bad Nazis are, and in that regard they are a special case even if it's still a extreme-right position on the political spectrum. There is no slippery slope.

Now of course it would be ideal if the law could deal with them, but it can't in the US and won't in the foreseeable future. Telling people, especially minorities, who live under those circumstances that violence is wrong and you can't condone or support their actions when it's one of the few tools they have to resist against Nazis that are largely unchecked by the law is incredibly disrespectful in my mind. Arguing from an ivory tower about principles and what you can and can't condone when there are literally Nazis killing people to those who are affected by it is something I can't and won't do.
 

iapetus

Scary Euro Man
Pretty sure even most of the right wing doesn't want to be associated with the nazis.

I know. And that's why I don't want to treat Nazism as something outside of politics. Because the fuckers at the hard end of the right wing absolutely deserve and need to be associated with them.

1) If you want to have the guy arrested for punching someone, fine. I'll still buy him a beer when he gets out.

I want to have the nazi arrested before it gets to the point where someone has to punch him, personally.

2) If you trust law enforcement to actually hold white supremacists accountable you're very trusting.

I don't, sadly. Pretty sure I said that too. I just don't believe that punching people is the right response to that - though I understand why others do.

You can't tolerate intolerance, because intolerance will not tolerate you. Fascism needs to be purged or it will purge you.

Again, I agree with you. The only point I disagree on is that I don't think violently assaulting people is the right way to deal with it. I am not tolerant of intolerance in the slightest. But punching someone like this isn't going to make them or those around them feel purged. It's going to make them feel vindicated.
 
The entirety of WW2 was fought because of a difference in politics. Our great/grandparents killed people with guns and bombs because they were Nazis. They died to make sure Nazis were wiped off the face of the Earth.

I mean that's not really accurate. It was fought because Nazi Germany kept invading its neighbours, not because they were governed by the NSDAP. Whether Germany was a democratic country, an absolute monarchy or a communist state, the responses were based on geopolitics before any other consideration. Even the Soviet Union, mortal ideological enemies of the fascists, were happy to jump into bed with the Nazis if it meant they got to split the Eastern European pie with the Germans. Had Germany not attacked Poland, the Nazi state would still quite possibly be sitting there today.
 
I was - I have been demodded as a knee-jerk reaction to someone not understanding my point, or not being able to tolerate it. That's fine with me. Anyone who knows me or has read anything I've posted in the past knows that I am not in any way a Nazi sympathiser or apologist. I am, however, a big believer in justice, and that means that I'm going to be against vigilante violence, whether it's against Nazis or not, and whether it's by police, random bystanders or Batman himself.

I think you confuse "justice" with some concept of civilization or order. Or at least you have a concept of justice that differs significantly from my own. What is just about allowing a free and open practice of the Nazi ideology? Is justice what is enshrined in law?

Again, I said earlier that "Violence is never the correct course of action" is wonderful statement on the whole, but it's a whole other discussion. When does violence become just? Self-defense? What about pre-emptive action? Or does government-sanctioned violence only reach the just level? If you decry violence of a citizen, then are changes that comes only after a riot - see Stonewall or the LA Riots - a poor outcome because the impetus may be negative? Is the justice in the outcome or the action?

I ask, because these are relevant questions. I'm not saying I would punch a Nazi, but I find "Violence is never an answer" to be a statement that misses the reality of the world we live in. It's a statement that were should attempt to live up to, but not one that passes any muster when you look at it critically.

And for everyone criticising me for using the phrase 'political position' to describe Nazism, would you not describe it as an extreme right-wing ideology? Because that's the language of politics. Placing it outside that sometimes is a dangerous move, because it treats it like it's some kind of special case, and it isn't. It's an example of the worst one of the most unpleasant extremes in politics has to offer, and treating it as something separate makes it more difficult to say that other positions in the same part of the political spectrum have many aspects that are just as bad.

Generally, I take the ideology based on genetic and ethnic cleaning as outside of politics but that's just me.
 

Nephix

Member
Mixed feelings about this; on the one hand justice got served but on the other, where do we draw the line for what is "ok" and not when it comes to violence?
Have a feeling some people in here would even go as far as applaud excessive violence or even murder if the receiving end is a shitstain.

We have a justice system, if it's not working, we need to work together to fix it.
 

Fisty

Member
All actions have consequences. If somebody wants to wear a fucking Swastika in public in 2017 and exercise his right to free speech, he can. And if he gets the shit beaten out of him, that's not censorship, it's being held accountable for your behavior.

Assault is a crime, and the person who hit him may well be punished. If they are, they should wear that as a badge of honor that they did the morally right thing even if it wasn't the legal thing. I wouldn't agree with the idea of a government dictating which individual groups are okay to assault and which aren't.

Personally I'd still feel much more sorry for the puncher than the Nazi.

Yep 1st Amendment protects you from the govt, not the people. Punching a Nazi in the face is an act of civil disobidience, and yeah you might get charged but you can be proud of what you stood for (and probably just post bail and get time served, considering the publicity this got)
 

Osukaa

Member
Can we stop with the hyperbole please. No one is doing what you say.

Let's look at a real actual possible situation. This dude gets punched, goes down, hits his head on that concrete wall behind him on the way down. Like the poster earlier stated about his friend, guy gets some brain damage and his speech patterns are messed up and is never quite the same again. Again, let me reiterate this is something that actually happened to someone from getting cold-cocked. Are you OK with that happening to this guy? Do you feel the punishment fits the crime?

Yup
 

Eylos

Banned
Nazism is an ideology with racist political positions, when you mix racism with political positions, It becomes bigotry, nazism is essentially racist, you dont have nazism without hate speech, so nazism is bigotry and shouldnt be accepted as a valid political position, even If Its a political position.
 
One doesn't involve mob justice.
We either live in a democratic state or we don't. We can't close our eyes to the judicial system whenever it suits us.

By the way, not American. It's harder for you since you do not trust your police, and since most of them are equally racist.

This is my thinking too. I don't blame people for giving up as their faith in the justice system and in law enforcement is so low, but any fair reading of history suggests that you cannot both have a free society and discriminate at the same time. It's a oxymoron.

Democracy has never been satisfying. It's never been a way that gave a big sense of justice. Democracy encourages dumb masses, collective idiocy and surpressed thinking that goes against the grain. But we have democracy because it's the only only way we know of how to be able to say what you want without fear of persecution.
On the far left spectrum, the authoritarian state supresses the groups and classes it does not like, and on the far right it is the authoritarian dictator who surpresses everyone who obstruct his idea of a strong society. On both ends, a lot of people get hurt.



You just gonna keep digging that grave with Nazism as a political position huh?

He is not wrong in that a political position has nothing to do with ethics, logic and morale. It's a political position of wanting everyone to jump out of windows.
The world always has been full of deplorable fucking people. Nazism wasn't the first and it won't be the last moronic way of thinking.


The onus is on if we should cleanse stupid hateful people from society. Can we control that hand and make sure we only harm the bad people? That's the main ideological difference.



You can't tolerate intolerance, because intolerance will not tolerate you. Fascism needs to be purged or it will purge you.

This is a chicken and egg scenario. There is no way to get out of this, because what foregoes what is tolerance is based on personal bias. I can already hear them "to me the nazi symbol is not a hatesymbol, but just represents a desire to protect our own", "to me the confederate flag is about our proud heritage", "zwarte piet is about a trandition, and has nothing to do will bad harmful carticatures".

You can skin the camel anyway you want, but at the end of the day, if you're going to deal with intolerance by being intolerant, you are on the way to becoming the new authoritarian intolerant evil.
"We have to destroy them before they destroy us" is a classic way to start a genocide historically.
 

KoopaTheCasual

Junior Member
I just need to say, the mods here have had their work cut out for them since the election and they've done a great job.

Clearly, everyone will disagree with a decision a mod makes at some point. That's natural. But between threads like this and the PewDiePie threads over in gaming, they've made it very clear where GAF stands on certain issues that truly should not ever be up for debate.

It's nice to see that in an internet landscape filled with your wishy-washy take-no-action sites like Reddit and Twitter.

Kudos.
+1

Gaf really became a haven of sanity for me, while other online communities resorted to clutching their free speech pearls instead of stomping out hate speech. This site and this community are as real as they come.
 

y2dvd

Member
I'm glad the title change because the original one didn't seem to be true. Just a random Captain America punching a Nazi.
 

Sunster

Member
Mixed feelings about this; on the one hand justice got served but on the other, where do we draw the line for what is "ok" and not when it comes to violence?
Have a feeling some people in here would even go as far as applaud excessive violence or even murder if the receiving end is a shitstain.

We have a justice system, if it's not working, we need to work together to fix it.

you should get right on that then.
 
I would be shocked if someone walking down the street with that on their arm wasn't assaulted to be honest. Most of us have relatives that either died or were physically/mentally scarred fighting these cunts and their allies, and to see a prick like this enjoying the privilege of the society they fought for basically throwing it back in their faces is equally depressing and infuriating.
 

Syder

Member
And for everyone criticising me for using the phrase 'political position' to describe Nazism, would you not describe it as an extreme right-wing ideology? Because that's the language of politics. Placing it outside that sometimes is a dangerous move, because it treats it like it's some kind of special case, and it isn't. It's an example of the worst one of the most unpleasant extremes in politics has to offer, and treating it as something separate makes it more difficult to say that other positions in the same part of the political spectrum have many aspects that are just as bad.
Wearing a hate symbol andd verbally abusing people in public is not an 'ideology', it's low level trolling. This guy wanted a reaction and he got one.
 

Fisty

Member
I mean that's not really accurate. It was fought because Nazi Germany kept invading its neighbours, not because they were governed by the NSDAP. Whether Germany was a democratic country, an absolute monarchy or a communist state, the responses were based on geopolitics before any other consideration. Even the Soviet Union, mortal ideological enemies of the fascists, were happy to jump into bed with the Nazis if it meant they got to split the Eastern European pie with the Germans. Had Germany not attacked Poland, the Nazi state would still quite possibly be sitting there today.

I meant more that for the people that actually fought the war, not the dudes sitting around in plush chairs. You're correct, though.
 
Executioner.

And what they did was hit a nazi being a nazi in public.

Whether they're Nazis is absolutely relevant.

You're doing the same thing the other guy was trying to do, which is (whether you consciously recognize it or just outright refuse to acknowledge your actions) normalizing Nazi beliefs by using bullshit hypotheticals to draw parallels to other ideologies. Like, the non-genocidal ones.

Consistently saying "what I believe doesn't matter" and "whether they're right or not is irrelevant" doesn't even make any sense. Of course what you believe matters. Of course whether they're right or not is relevant. Why wouldn't it be? Why shouldn't it be? You can't say you're not advocating for moral relativism while specifically pushing a hypothetical narrative that relies on it.

You keep missing that the justification for applauding this move is 100% tied up in that relevance. You can't divorce "what you believe" from this scenario, nor should you be asked to because someone somewhere might apply the same action to a lesser cause and try (and fail at) blaming the positive reaction to this as their reasoning.

You get what I'm saying here? You're worried more about what might happen down the line if intolerance towards genocidal figures "goes mainstream."

It gets no more mainstream than World War II, yunno?

History means something. That symbol means something. And the response to the people willingly parading in public espousing the inhumane, genocidal ideas that symbol represents means something.

Trying to work up a scenario where it doesn't seems pointless, to me, beyond whatever mild utility as a sci-fi thought exercise it might have.

Quoting for the simple fact this should be on more pages if this thread is to continue.
 

Glass Rebel

Member
Mixed feelings about this; on the one hand justice got served but on the other, where do we draw the line for what is "ok" and not when it comes to violence?
Have a feeling some people in here would even go as far as applaud excessive violence or even murder if the receiving end is a shitstain.

We have a justice system, if it's not working, we need to work together to fix it.

Here. We draw the line here.

Punching nazis is ok. Punching people that don't call for the extermination of innocent people is not ok.

Like, is this so difficult?
 

Arkanius

Member
Gonna go with "don't," then. If the only option is to rely on institutions of state to repress white supremacy, the American government absolutely will not do it. (Other countries don't necessarily have white supremacist boot camps spread throughout their police forces but I'd still be skeptical about how reliably they would push back against this sort of thing.)



Nah. This has never been true and it's been demonstrated ever more clearly recently -- people come out in the open as white supremacists because they're jacked up on collective power and they think everyone's gonna support and assist them. Take away their physical power and the support of their community and most of them will wuss the fuck out. We've literally already seen this happen with the Nazi plan shifting from "hold giant intimidating rallies" to "pretend to hold rallies and not show up" after just one event, because they couldn't stand being outnumbered and at risk.

I live in a country where until mid 70's lived in a right wing dictatorship and where the communist party has a 10% representation of the total votes in the present day. My reality is a bit different hence why I'm not very vocal of mob justice.

But fair enough guys, I should not project my views into a reality different than my own. Just my two cents.
 

Chaplain

Member
Why do you care about what some nazi is feeling? Why should anybody?

That depends on a person's worldview. If people do not have intrinsic value and worth, dehumanizing others is not good or evil because human beings do not have any ultimate purpose other than the purposes espoused by Natural Selection (i.e., passing on our DNA). However, if people do have intrinsic value and worth we are called to love on our enemies and neighbors. As a Christian, all people are created in the Image of God. This means that even our enemies have intrinsic value and worth.
 
Good old fashion justice...

Guarantee he will never do dumb shit like that ever again.

I hope His friends and co workers and maybe even a mean older brother troll/roast his ass for getting knocked the fuck out and falling into a deep sleep looking all comfy.

Lol at literally no one helping.
 

kiyomi

Member
Why do you care about what some nazi is feeling? Why should anybody?

Because, even if it's tempting to want to disregard some Nazi's feelings, their feelings still have consequences. Maybe this dude that got clocked is emboldened by the publicity he gets and goes back out with his armband on next week. Maybe he goes into cowardice and never does this shit again. Who knows? Their feelings matter in the sense that feelings dictate what we as humans do.
 
Never going to condone this shit. If you think that violently assaulting someone solely for their political views - however reprehensible they might be - is okay, then you are not one of the good guys. Even the person who may or may not have been responsible for this happening is refusing to identify himself - because he believes that exactly the same will happen to him, at the hands of someone who thinks his political position is unacceptable.
Cry me a fucking river. Being a Nazi isn't just a "political views." You're a piece of shit, through and through.
 

iapetus

Scary Euro Man
"Believer" in "justice," how is any of this just?

It isn't. And there's a scale that they sit on. Every one of those things you listed is an absolute fucking travesty, and on the sliding scale of shitness, I place them way higher than a Nazi getting punched. Some things are more unjust than others, and anyone who puts nazi-getting-punched above execution-by-cop-for-being-black is batshit insane.

That doesn't mean I have to see vigilante violence as being a good thing, though. And I don't, because while in one case it might be someone who I think deserves what they're getting on some level, I do not trust the angry mob any more than I trust the US police system.

We are judge, jury, and executioner because the judges, juries, and executioners refuse, on purpose or by mistake, to dole out justice.

That way lies bad shit. History has taught us that. So if there is any way to avoid it, we should, and if we've already reached the point where we can't, it's a sad day. I don't believe that day has come yet.
 

CloudWolf

Member
I mean, he's the one wearing a swastika, that's pretty much asking for it.

By the way, why the fuck is it not illegal to wear a Nazi armband?

That depends on a person's worldview. If people do not have intrinsic value and worth, dehumanizing others is not good or evil because human beings do not have any ultimate purpose other than the purposes espoused by Natural Selection (i.e., passing on our DNA). However, if people do have intrinsic value and worth we are called to love on our enemies and neighbors. As a Christian, all people are created in the Image of God. This means that even our enemies have intrinsic value and worth.
Why the fuck would you show love to people who are openly admitting they side with a group of people whose ideal world consists of non-white, Jewish, gay and disabled people to all be either dead or imprisoned? Those people do not deserve love, from no one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom