Shola racially abused

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
It shouldn't need to be a defence, because people shouldn't be getting arrested for something they've said. It does have the power to hurt people, you're right, but it also has the power to hurt corrupt governments or corporations, and cause social revolutions for the benefit of society - And that's the reason people shouldn't be punished for things they've said.
I understand that free speech can bring about social change and I will get out of this country the moment I feel I cannot speak out against the government or a corporation - but using the excuse of "freedom of speech" to make a personal attack against someone's race, or religion, or whatever is something I personally will always believe as wrong.

It's not about 'letting them get away with it'. It's that despite the fact that we disagree with them they should still be allowed to hold those opinions, and not be punished for it unless they're going out attacking someone for it.

Holding opinions and expressing them are two entirely different things, but that's probably as good a place as any to admit that we're never going to completely agree on this. I'm probably a bit naive and young, and in fairness I think you have more of the moral high ground. <ok>
 
Fair enough.

Don't get me wrong here, I don't like defending racists. I just really can't get behind the idea that they should be arrested just for words, or at least words on the internet, which is a lot different to going up to someone in the street and shouting slurs at them.
 
didnt some **** stains start abusing a footballer in newcastle a couple of weeks ago on fb ???
take the piss if you ask me thinking there safe behind a keyboard
 
Anyone who thinks words can't cause harm has clearly never been bullied. A girl the year below me at school killed her self the year I left, was never physically harmed by anyone but words can do horrendous psychological damage and lead to that sort of thing. People may have a right to free speech but we also have a right not to be abused. The right to free speech is about expression of opinions. Calling Shola a 'f***ing n*****' is not expressing an opinion, its simply abuse and should be punished as such. Don't glamorise what these people are doing, they aren't speaking out against authority and they aren't stating a radical new idea that goes against the beliefs of others. They are simply being rude about a player who as underperformed using language which is unacceptable in polite society.
 
these scum bags wouldnt be calling them names if they was locked up in jail with them in america
they would be there bitches ,should count them selves lucky for this
 
Anyone who thinks words can't cause harm has clearly never been bullied. A girl the year below me at school killed her self the year I left, was never physically harmed by anyone but words can do horrendous psychological damage and lead to that sort of thing. People may have a right to free speech but we also have a right not to be abused. The right to free speech is about expression of opinions. Calling Shola a 'f***ing n*****' is not expressing an opinion, its simply abuse and should be punished as such. Don't glamorise what these people are doing, they aren't speaking out against authority and they aren't stating a radical new idea that goes against the beliefs of others. They are simply being rude about a player who as underperformed using language which is unacceptable in polite society.

It is an opinion, whether you like it or not. And yes, they're not speaking out against authority, but punishing people for doing that is only a few steps further than this.
 
Fair enough.

Don't get me wrong here, I don't like defending racists. I just really can't get behind the idea that they should be arrested just for words, or at least words on the internet, which is a lot different to going up to someone in the street and shouting slurs at them.

You don't know the law, so shut up. I know, because this is a forum, you could easily reply, and you'd cite this as a perfect example of free speech. Except one problem, it has moderators, bacause otherwise this website would crash and the purpose it was designed for would be destroyed. Life and law has moderators for this exact purpose.

So, if you have nothing worthwhile saying, say nothing.
 
You don't know the law, so shut up. I know, because this is a forum, you could easily reply, and you'd cite this as a perfect example of free speech. Except one problem, it has moderators, bacause otherwise this website would crash and the purpose it was designed for would be destroyed. Life and law has moderators for this exact purpose.

So, if you have nothing worthwhile saying, say nothing.


well said my friend
 
You don't know the law, so shut up. I know, because this is a forum, you could easily reply, and you'd cite this as a perfect example of free speech. Except one problem, it has moderators, bacause otherwise this website would crash and the purpose it was designed for would be destroyed. Life and law has moderators for this exact purpose.

So, if you have nothing worthwhile saying, say nothing.

Whether I know the law or not is irrelevant, as we're talking about whether it's morally right or wrong rather than legally right or wrong.
This website wouldn't "crash" due to not having moderators, and the fact that you even think that's how things work shows a rather startling amount of ignorance.
Regardless of that, no one is saying we don't need police, or at least I certainly wasn't, what I was saying is that arresting people for something they've said, particularly on the internet, is a dangerous path to be treading, as although in this case it was something completely foul that someone said (or I'm assuming it is - I haven't actually read the comment), it could just as easily be someone speaking out against corruption etc.

Perhaps you should follow your own advice, pal, as you've added absolutely nothing of any value to this topic. Though based on your post the subject matter is a little above you.
 
Whether I know the law or not is irrelevant, as we're talking about whether it's morally right or wrong rather than legally right or wrong.
This website wouldn't "crash" due to not having moderators, and the fact that you even think that's how things work shows a rather startling amount of ignorance.
Regardless of that, no one is saying we don't need police, or at least I certainly wasn't, what I was saying is that arresting people for something they've said, particularly on the internet, is a dangerous path to be treading, as although in this case it was something completely foul that someone said (or I'm assuming it is - I haven't actually read the comment), it could just as easily be someone speaking out against corruption etc.

Perhaps you should follow your own advice, pal, as you've added absolutely nothing of any value to this topic. Though based on your post the subject matter is a little above you.

Oooh fun, where to begin with the deconstruction...

So first you say “Whether I know the law or not is irrelevant, as we're talking about whether it's morally right or wrong rather than legally right or wrong.”

You use the term “racists” in your previous post. That is a legally defined term of moral prompting, and this is in fact a strong determinant in the passing of many laws, thus in so obviously admitting to possessing such ambivalence (or indeed ignorance) to the underlying legal issues, your moral considerations are understandably on faulty grounds before you even begin to express your “opinion”. I say “opinion”, what I mean is a rather poor attempt at passing off a pseudo-intellectual position (defined seemingly by your clear aspiration to claim ethical higher ground and some mistaken and rather deluded occupation with psychological patterning) as some form of great philosophical consideration… Unfortunately, I have to point out that your own failure to retaliate with a salient comment alludes to this inability to debate the most academic of insights.

Next you move to “This website wouldn't "crash" due to not having moderators, and the fact that you even think that's how things work shows a rather startling amount of ignorance.
Regardless of that, no one is saying we don't need police, or at least I certainly wasn't”

Why would we need police or moderators, then, if everything would be as “hippy-commune-esque” as you imply? I implore you to take this up with your mods and the creator of the website.
If you have had experience of creating a sports forum with no moderation that is doing so fantastically well, then why are you on here?

And then my highlight, “what I was saying is that arresting people for something they've said, particularly on the internet, is a dangerous path to be treading, as although in this case it was something completely foul that someone said (or I'm assuming it is - I haven't actually read the comment), it could just as easily be someone speaking out against corruption etc.”

“Perhaps you should follow your own advice, pal, as you've added absolutely nothing of any value to this topic. Though based on your post the subject matter is a little above you.”

Parroting my demeanor is childish and frankly one of the most extrovert strategies for underlining that the other person has bested you… What is interesting (/expected) is that you’ve taken up such a response considering I just used "words" mate… they can’t hurt you… Or your cousins (who probably possess as many IQ points as they have digits, which, considering Norwich, that’s undoubtedly incredibly many, though I hope you have more digits than 1)… Or your mother (who I’m sure is one of the cousins)… At least this is just the internet, eh mate…? ;);)
I know you can’t be pissed at me, given your line of argument. Instead it’s much more likely you’re simply misunderstood, but in my defence, your mum’s (/cousin’s) probable heavy smoking and drinking has adversely affected your ability to even tolerate mild critique (whilst I bet direct sunshine gives you incest-inducing craving eh?)…. But you can’t get mad… You said so… The "attack the argument not the man" outlook taking a very ironic turn here!

I like the tactic of posting late though... Very manly.

Good job I'm up, hoping you are too...

Love, The JPF.
 
Was it a Toon fan who abused Shola? If so, what an ungrateful ****er. Shola has put in over 10 years of service for the club, how could anyone say that to him?
 
Was it a Toon fan who abused Shola? If so, what an ungrateful ****er. Shola has put in over 10 years of service for the club, how could anyone say that to him?

Cos he's **** <ok>

Only kidding though, he seems like a top lad. Most likely some thick chav kids.
 
Was it a Toon fan who abused Shola? If so, what an ungrateful ******. Shola has put in over 10 years of service for the club, how could anyone say that to him?

Not sure it really matters does it? It's horrendous whatever the context, and Sammy dealt with it in exactly the correct manner!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.