Quote:I, for one, felt the same way about the "art" exhibits that offended Christians. Yes, that was bratty kids acting out. Had Christians attacked the exhibitions violently, would you not condemn them? Are you insinuating that I condone the gunmen who attacked in Texas? Honestly, I feel it goes without saying their actions were abhorrent.

 

The gunmen were to blame for the shooting. Do you honestly and sincerely believe the organizers of the event in Texas were not daring someone to attack them? If not, then what was the point? That we have freedom of speech in the US? That is obvious to all but the most paranoid and delusional.

 

If you stir the pot, or poke the bear, and get burnt or bit, you are partially responsible.

 

Of course the question is would you blame the artist for instigating the attack from the Christians?

 

I'm not saying you condone the gunman not at all, I'm saying the  blame is 100% alone on those that commit that aggression. Speaking ignorantly or foolishly is beside the point, that is a protected constitutional right. The moment we start requiring "responsible" free speech is the moment we've allowed the 1st Amendment to be compromised.

 

Otherwise you're saying the acts of aggression work, if you want your specific group to be immune to criticism, ridicule or any other form of discussion commit terror and we will stop.

---