[FRIAM] God in Science and Religion (was Re: why some people hate cops)

[uǝlƃ ↙↙↙]

Excellent! That answers it nicely. I just wasn't sure if that *was* the flag or if you were saying it didn't need a flag and merely using it to segue.

Yes, there's some slippery ground around "protected classes", which is why the composition of the SCOTUS is so important.

On 9/25/20 8:15 AM, Stephen Guerin wrote:
>  "Flagging" a post to me would have been a list admin email of the sort:
>    "In the judgment of the List Admin, this speech is considered hate speech and will not be tolerated in this forum. This is a warning. Any posters that use this type of language will be given a public warning and if their post behavior continues they will be unsubscribed"
> 
> I think my original post was clear. As list admin, I did not feel Marcus post called for this type of action/flagging. I gave one reason that the risk of inciting violence was near zero and my follow up post which you quote is I also understand the sentiment behind Marcus's post.
> 
> And then I concluded the "list admin" portion of my post as intellectually wondering what constitutes hate speech. In my little corner of the world, I've never had to make that determination as a manager or any other position of authority. Nor have I been part of large enough organizations to sit through seminars listen to this sort of expertise. I did find your EricC reference interesting in this regard if a "majority" could be a protected class. Relatedly, I came across this WaPO article <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/07/07/canadian-judge-punching-a-caucasian-and-yelling-i-hate-white-people-isnt-a-hate-crime/> of a First Nation/Native woman yelled "I hate white people" and then punched a lady in the nose and it was judged not a hate crime.
> 
> I hope I was clear in the 2nd part of my post replying as a list member and "religious"  person to bring up what I wanted to talk about.

-- 
↙↙↙ uǝlƃ