If you believe in the principle, as you are saying here and I have no reason to disbelieve, may I suggest that you make that clear to all and sundry involved?
What an absurd exercise in irrelevance. Should I also say "crime is bad though, mmmkay?" any time I criticize police for shooting yet another unarmed citizen? Should I have a sig file with "stay in school" and "don't do bad shit" as well? Should I start any subsequent reviews I make of SP's with "I hate terrorists"? And do I really need to preface every single motherfucking post I make from this point on with my wholehearted support of puppies and rainbows?
But sure, if it makes you happy. I wholeheartedly believe in the principle of free speech. Where's my motherfucking cookie?
Because the principle of free speech isn't "easy", and if you're going to believe in it and defend it you might have to say more than "that bitch was stupid".
No. No I don't. That bitch was stupid. She had a right to be stupid, but that doesn't change the fact that she and her little circus event are stupid. There is no fucking obligation to "prove" my bona fides as a free speech crusader by going into any more detail about her right to be a stupid cunt, even if I expend hella more pixels on precisely why she is a stupid cunt. Speaking of which...
That said: while I'm not a fan of how these people handled things in Texas, and while I fully support their right to do so, I think their purpose to stir up speech on this topic has validity. Simply as a demonstration of free speech, to do a thing because you can do it, how is this effectively any different than Slut Walks or Scout Willis walking around NYC topless? I know you support that, nobody123, but doesn't this competition in Texas serve as much a purpose as those?
So what makes it "icky" to you? Break it down. What makes this "icky" and Slut Walks/Scout Willis topless (other than the obvious prurient, of course) or any of the hundreds of other ways one can exercise one's freedom of speech/expression? What about this bothers you?
It's "icky" because it is a publicity stunt for a contemptible sack of shit of a human being that has succeeded beyond her wildest expectations, not in the least because it resulted in death and suffering. It is "icky" because anything that gives a platform for someone that promotes hate, racism, and terrorism (just, you know, not the Muslim kind) is icky. It is "icky" because as Art Spiegelman put it so much more eloquently than I ever will, "Pam Geller’s organization is intentionally trying to start war of culture with Islam by saying that all Muslims are terrorists under the surface, and we’re going to prove it. Do the group members deserve free speech protection? Of course. But they’re hiding behind that banner with things that have very little to do with free speech and a lot to do with race hate." (
http://time.com/3849465/art-spiegelman-je-suis-charlie-but-im-not-pamela-geller/ ) It is "icky" because if these shitstains had the slightest intention of actually pushing the boundaries of free expression, they would have included cartoons of, say, Jesus giving Mohammad a blow job. You know why nothing even close happened? Because these fucksticks care no more for actual freedom of speech than they do for freedom of religion. Pamela Geller and her legion of assclowns are PRECISELY the type of hypocrites so many here want me to be. Alas, I ain't your Huckleberry. They have the right. No question. Doesn't mean it is good, decent, ethical, etc.
Slut Walks, meanwhile, promote more than hatred for others thinly veiled by bullshit equivocating about free speech. Slut Walks promote the very good, right, ethical, etc. idea that just because a woman dresses provocatively there is no reason to harass or assault them. As for Scout Willis... never really gave her much though, but, well, I like tits. (aw hell. I just had to go all prurient there, didn't I)