That’s a scary thought, guard your fireplace!

People need to stop with ridiculous conspiracy theories. You’ve become what you hate

Because someone needs to be enslaved to provide universial health care. If even one person wants to opt out, no matter how wrong their reason you if you allow don’t allow it they are enslaved.

Congratulations, you just said the dumbest thing I’ve read on the Internet in a very long time. That’s impressive!

I pay for the military, for roads, for schools, for police, for fire departments…and I can’t opt out of any of that. So am I already a slave? If so, then I might as well get some healthcare out of the deal.

If I’m not already a slave then universal healthcare isn’t making me a slave either. No one would be forcing you to use your healthcare either.

Oh did Democrats stop the Republicans when the winds shifted?

Oh no they didn’t. They went along with them.

What the hell are you talking about? Your comment is entirely divorced from reality. There were 175 cloture votes to break a filibuster on nominees during the Obama administration and 314 during Trump. Nearly doubled in half the time.

When Schumer was minority leader, he vigorously used the filibuster to do just that. Under his leadership, Democrats used the filibuster to block funding for construction of Trump’s border wall in 2019. They used it not once, but twice to impede passage of the Cares Act — forcing Republicans to agree to changes including a $600 weekly federal unemployment supplement. They used it in September and October to stop Republicans from passing further coronavirus relief before the November election. They used it to halt Sen. Tim Scott’s (R-S.C.) police reform legislation so Republicans could not claim credit for forging a bipartisan response to the concerns of racial justice protesters. They used it to block legislation to force “sanctuary cities” to cooperate with federal officials, and to stop a prohibition on taxpayer funding of abortion, bans on abortions once the unborn child is capable of feeling pain, and protections for the lives of babies born alive after botched abortions. - Washington Post

I don’t pay attention to the news (haven’t for many years now) and I firmly believe it’s okay that I don’t.

I also don’t vote because, at this point, I’d consider myself the definition of an uninformed voter.

You’re essentially keeping yourself ignorant, and then saying you’re too ignorant to take action. Just ridiculous.

So much of what’s presented by the media doesn’t impact my day-to-day life in the slightest.

Trump was elected and as a direct result: Roe was overturned, pregnant women are having their lives risked over non-viable pregnancies, others are forced to have children they don’t want, gun control has been struck down, Christian Nationalism is heavily asserting itself at a time when fewer and fewer people are religious, the pandemic was bungled leading to thousands and thousands of unnecessary deaths, $2t was given away to the uber-wealthy, air and water quality standards were rolled back, ultra-conservative judges have been instituting national bans from the 5th circuit, gay and trans rights have been rolled back…and on and on…and that’s without getting to all the states banning books and destroying the social safety net.

I guess you could not be a woman, not know a woman, not care about getting shot, or know anyone who you don’t want to see get shot, like oppressive religious tenets foisted upon you, not worry about dying of communicable disease, or know anyone that you wouldn’t want to see die of communicable disease, be ok with your tax dollars being given to the rich, and not be gay or trans or care about anyone who is…but you must at least breath air and drink water, right?

It all affects you, you’re just too ignorant to realize how. Your apathy and indifference are what allows shitty people to hurt others. But if you don’t care about that, no one can force you.

No, not even a little bit. There is a difference between being an asshole and committing a hate crime.

I’m not sure there is a difference with this law.

Hate crime laws, when properly crafted and enforced, are an important component of a functional society.

I’m not sure that’s true. Freedom of speech is an important component, and sometimes that means tolerating distasteful speech.

They can act as a deterrent, but they are also a way for those materially harmed by a hate crime to get justice.

What constitutes harm though? The UK tends to include offense (or offence) as a harm.

Free speech is never a universal right, anywhere in the world. There are always legitimate restrictions to ensure the public’s overall health and safety.

Absolutely, but being offended by a bigot probably shouldn’t be criminal without some component of advocacy for violence.

A person commits an offence if they communicate material, or behave in a manner, “that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive,” with the intention of stirring up hatred based on protected characteristics.