Stefan MolyneuxVerified account

yes it is

It’s only hate speech if someone is offended, and that someone has to be a liberal, the rest of us just think “what a prat” and then we move on!

In order for something to be refuted, the refutation has to be logically consistent, non- contradictory, and based on sound logic, reasoning, evidence, facts, and/or axioms. I have yet to see anyone "refute" Stef's arguments based on the minimum requirements of a valid argument.

First you claimed that Stefan's arguments get refuted in his threads, now you acknowledge that it doesn't happen so, you just assume he has encountered valued refutations? You moved the goal-post to an argument without evidence. And you think that is a valid argument?

If we applied this form of "argumentation" against you. I could argue, "Lisa Shane is a rapist. She raped me." Then you would say that is a lie and tell me there is no evidence. I would reply, "Well, no I don't have any evidence, but I'm sure evidence exists. Lock her up." Valid?

Define "hate speech" and they try to come up with a scenario where I can't use your definition to label something that you have said (including posting your definition) as "hate speech". Anything can be labeled as "hate speech" by the person who doesn't like what they hear.