Hate is in the eyes of the beholder and who is going to set the standards on what constitutes hate? Is disagreement hate? sarcasm? humor? symbolism?
What offends one may not necessarily offend another, is being offended by someone's post now mean it's 'hate'? I hate liberals and everything they stand for, am I allowed to voice that sentiment or is that more 'hate' speech? Am I now a hateful person? But I also love conservatism, why am I not now a person full of love? This whole 'hate' debate is nauseatingly feminine, am I now a sexist?
You can't censor hateful thoughts in a 'free' Republic and still be free but you can expose them for what they are with a consensus of legitimate responses IF in fact hate is what they truly are, is any and all name-calling now considered 'hate' speech and was Free Republic's primary purpose to be a forum free from acrimony or dare I say 'hate' thoughts?
To many liberals, simple disapproval = “hate”.
Except, of course, the other way around about non-liberals.
Then anything goes...
I could see it coming back in 1982 when I was 7 or 8 years old. I was over at my friend's house to play, and in casual stupid-kid conversation I mentioned that I hated someone. I don't remember who I was talking about. I just remember how little that statement meant to me. It wasn't a raw, seething hatred rising to a boil. I was probably talking about someone from school who smelled funny—I didn't mean much by it at all. Yet, after I said that, my friend's mother descended on me like a hawk, looked deep into my eyes and said, "Joe, you don't hate ANYBODY. You didn't mean that." But I did mean that, by my definition of the word; and now I hated her as well.
Now it seems that whatever crazy definition of "hate" she was operating under has become the national standard. How did the chasm between "dislike" and "hate" grow to be so huge? There are plenty of other words to indicate extreme dislike ("despise", "abhor", "loathe" come to mind), so why has "hate" been given Hitlerian stature? It now not only indicates dislike, but for many it implies bigotry and probably intent to kill as well. At the time of this writing, a Google search on "hate" brings up anti-racism websites as the top four results. Many times I have found myself in the following exchange:
ME: "He sucks. I hate him."
RANDOM IDIOT: "Really? I don't hate anybody."
The "I don't hate anybody" people are immediately added to the list of people I hate. I don't know if it's their smug arrogance or the sheer dishonesty that bugs me more. Or maybe it's the fact that they're a different color than I am and I plan on killing them.
Very well said, BTW.
I agree absolutely! Wonderful explanation.
Too many people fall into the Liberal trap of PC thinking.
According to liberals a “hate site” is (supposedly) one that promotes and encourages racist, violent, anti-(insert your favorite ethnic or liberal-activist group here) actions. FreeRepublic most definitely does not fit this moniker. (In truth according to most liberals a “hate-site” is one that opposes their views, political and social.)
Too many people fail to see the difference between individual posters writing “hateful”(Racist, aggressive, violent) things (who are dealt with accordingly), and a site that routinely endorses and promotes these types of thing — which FR does NOT.
The reason this is such a problem is because the MSM and those who disagree with our POLITICAL views do NOT take the time to hit the “view replies” button on these posts, and assume that such talk is applauded, encouraged, and endorsed. And, even if they did see that these posts are almost ALWAYS refuted and the poster is either banned, or run out of town, so to speak, they wouldn’t call attention to that because it wouldn’t suit their POLITICAL purpose — which is to label FR a “hate-site” so that people won’t bother coming here themselves, will avoid listening to our opinions, and then they will have effectively marginalized the power a large group like FR has. This is also not just an attack on FR, but indeed is an attack on the First Amendment itself (just like the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” which I, btw, expect liberals to try and apply to the internet in the near-future), and we should respond accordingly to this attack, even if we don’t like what some of the posters say here...
According to the Constitution and the 1st Amendment people have the right to SAY anything they want. People don’t have the right NOT to be offended by these things, but in turn have a right to respond and SAY whatever they want. (Keeping in line the laws against slander/libel, inciting riots, and basic responsibility (yelling FIRE when there is none, etc...), and the specific rules set up on this particular site, of course). It is our responsibility as CITIZENS of our country to stand up against this type of thing whether the site be conservative, OR liberal (i.e. DU, DailyKos, etc...).
This whole “PC” attitude is ruining our country and is absolutely aimed at weakening the 1st Amendment, and we all know via History what happens when a populace is not allowed to speak, think or write freely!
ANYONE who values this site at all, should be vocally opposed to labeling this site as a “hate-site” regardless of the problems we face with certain posters or certain posts. In standing up against this bull, perhaps we could START to turn the tables on the PC/anti-1st Amendment crowd in our society.