While engaged in a debate with one of the Sean Hannity Forum regulars, on the topic of homosexual marriage, I stated that I believed it was wrong to discriminate against gays based on the sexual predispositions.

I was immediately attacked with various innuendoes, accused of being homosexual, and called various pejoritives, including a "fag".

When I appealed to the moderator that this word was hate speech and should not be allowed to stand, you would not believe the debate that followed.

Aside from the ridiculous comments that the instigator of the slur "could have been referring to a cigarette", and other such ludicrous nonesense, the moderators immediately sided with the regular, essentially told me that they did not consider it a significant problem, and banned me from the forum for reporting the incident.

error

error

But I can't go on there and call him one without getting banned for it.

Notice what happens when you click on the Hannity Forum link for the full discussion:

http://www.hannity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=33826#33826


"That topic does not exist"


Funny how that works...

I'd have banned you just for being a smart-ass. You probably had several nicks and argued with yourself, sorta like your left-wing comrades do here to get something started or to pat themselves on the back.

Grow up.

So you also feel that it's okay to call people fags? Thanks for your input.

Anyone else?

>>So you also feel that it's okay to call people fags?
>I think Sean Hannity is a fag.

You mean like this?

>So you also feel that it's okay to call people fags?

No. Even the moderator said that. But, you're a smart-ass. You should get banned.

"You mean like this?"

Yes, that is exactly how I mean.

If I go to Hannity's webforum and call HIM a fag, the moderators would immediately ban me.

But if I call, say, Michael Moore a fag, that would be perfectly acceptable on Hannity's forum.

And if someone advocated the position of gay marriage, I could call them a "fag-lover" with impunity on Hannity's forum.

Is any of this sinking in?

>So you also feel that it's okay to call people fags?

"No."

Good to see that you at least have SOME moral scruples.

"Even the moderator said that. But, you're a smart-ass. You should get banned."

The moderators job is to moderate. What the moderator said was that the word "fuck" is bannable and the word "fag" is not. So either I should be allowed to call Hannity a fag or I shouldn't. I'm just trying to figure out which.

The moderator additionally said that the word "fuck" is worse than the word "fag".

Let's see. The word "fuck" is the slang term for the natural act of sexual intercourse.

The word fag is the offense term, arguably considered as hate speech, used to describe homosexual people.

Why is the natural act of sex considered more offensive to conservatives than hate speech against homosexuals.

Help me out here, I really want to understand.

This is the Republican idea of freedom of speech. If you're a smart ass, you should get banned. If you're a drug addict, you should go to jail (unless you're Rush Limbaugh). If you're a homo, you should be called a fag.

That (s)he didn't "condone" the word "fag".

To condone means to excuse, overlook, or make allowances for; be lenient with.

Then (s)he followed up by saying that it was not a bannable offense to use the word. So if the moderator doesn't ban for using the word (s)he therefore "condones" its use.

That's the bottom line.

Sean Hannity and his webforum moderators condone the use of the word "fag", which is in fact hate speech.

Any idiot should be able to figure it out.

Anger topped with nonsense. Not a winning formula, but nevertheless entertaining. Good EV.

Are you an abject moron?

I'm just here to laugh at you.

Carry on.

Frist of all, I believe this below..................

"While engaged in a debate with one of the Sean Hannity Forum regulars, on the topic of homosexual marriage, I stated that I believed it was wrong to discriminate against gays based on the sexual predispositions.
I was immediately attacked with various innuendoes, accused of being homosexual, and called various pejoritives, including a "fag". "

..................... is a LIE.

The word "fag" was certainly used, but I have no evidence it was used in the way you *claim* it was used.

What is certain is that you went there to flame and got what you deserved.

Frist (sic) of all...

What you consider to be a lie has absolutely no relevance as to the topic of this thread. This thread is about Sean Hannity's employee's advocation of hate speech.

I'm not here to convince you that conservatives are fascist hatemongers. That fact is self-evident and stands on its own merit, with no need for justification from the likes of me.

Secondly, it is YOU that attempt to engage in flaming tactics, which is also self-evident as observed by the sole nature of your comments.

So now I ask you, is it or is it not acceptable for Sean Hannity's web forum moderators to condone hate speech? How do you think this reflects upon Sean Hannity's views and opinions?

"The word "fag" was certainly used, but I have no evidence it was used in the way you *claim* it was used."

You have no evidence because the thread was succinctly deleted by the forum managers, as someone demonstrated above.

How convenient!

>I'm not here to convince you that conservatives are fascist hatemongers. That fact is self-evident and stands on its own merit, with no need for justification from the likes of me.

More smart-assed remarks.

>So now I ask you, is it or is it not acceptable for Sean Hannity's web forum moderators to condone hate speech? How do you think this reflects upon Sean Hannity's views and opinions?

I don't know that they did condone it seeing that I have no evidence as to how the word was used.

>How convenient!

How convenient for you that we having nothing to verify what you claim, except your own unquestionable integrity.

Look, if you wanna flame, stay here. If it's bitch-slapping you want, I'll be glad to do it to you. When Sheepdog first started posting here, it went under the handle "Rottweiler". It don't fuck with me no more, otherwise it'd be posting under the name "Poodle".

Same with Meyer London. It was formerly "Meyer Charles Winston Tudor Stuvessant Europe, III." It's now reduced to a first name and a city.

Stick around!

"More smart-assed remarks."

So. Ban me!

"I don't know that they did condone it seeing that I have no evidence as to how the word was used."

The evidence is posted above. The moderator clearly states that using the word "fag" is not bannable. Therefore, they condone it's use.

They're not the only ones:

http://www.shame.org/detail.html?28

http://www.shame.org/detail.html?1

http://www.shame.org/detail.html?70

http://www.shame.org/detail.html?296

http://www.shame.org/detail.html?13

http://www.shame.org/detail.html?12

http://www.shame.org/detail.html?299

http://www.shame.org/detail.html?3

Read up!

"How convenient for you that we having nothing to verify what you claim, except your own unquestionable integrity. "

If you really want to veryify go here:

http://www.hannity.com/forum/search.php?sid=0ad76eed3fa9395bab86cc66c600a4bc

search for commonly used hate words such as fag, faggot, nigger, wop, raghead, etc.

One could write a thesis on all the hate that is spewed by conservative thinkers (term used loosely).

"If it's bitch-slapping you want, I'll be glad to do it to you."

Ad violence against women to the list. You're a class act.

"Stick around!"

Oh! A toughguy!

I'm so scared.

What did you expect that they were going to say at that redneck website - we insist on civilized, refined behavior here? That would be like expecting such behavior from the sewer-dwelling poster who calls himself Observer.

"What did you expect that they were going to say at that redneck website?"

I had expected that the riff-raff would condone hate speech, but not the direct employees of Mr. Hannity. I found that fact to disparaging. These people are the mouthpiece for Mr. Hannity in that forum, and they clearly advocate hate speech against gays. If I were gay, I'd be in an uproar over this. I would be outside of Fox News headquarters protesting Mr. Hannity. I would call for a boycott of his hateful radio program. I might go so far as to filing a class action law suit against him, just for shits and giggles.

Mr. Hannity is directly responsible for the standards his employees adhere to on HIS website. And his standard is obviously one of filthy, disgusting hate.

>The evidence is posted above. The moderator clearly states that using the word "fag" is not bannable. Therefore, they condone it's use.

It depends on how it is used. The moderator gets to decide if it malice or not. If I have to explain to you how the word "fag" can be used without malice, you need help.

>redneck website

You didn't get onto ML for "hate speech". Saying "redneck" is hate speech.

You want hate speech, go to democraticunderground.com and read the hate speach by your liberal comrades.

We're here to make fun of liberals and anarchists. You could be next side-show.

Stick around!

"If I were gay, I'd be in an uproar over this. I would be outside of Fox News headquarters protesting Mr. Hannity. I would call for a boycott of his hateful radio program. I might go so far as to filing a class action law suit against him, just for shits and giggles."

Wow! I'm sure the gay community will be glad to know that if you were one of them you might actually take action. What a stand-up kinda guy!

"It depends on how it is used."

WRONG! FOR THE HUNDREDTH TIME:

The moderator CLEARLY STATED that the use of the word (FAG) is NOT BANNABLE! CHRIST!! You are slow on the uptake, aren't you?

"The moderator gets to decide if it malice or not. If I have to explain to you how the word "fag" can be used without malice, you need help."

Whether YOU believe it or not, that word was used quite freely in an exceptionally hateful manner on that forum, and when I pointed this our to the moderator, I was banned for doing so. You are being intentionally deceptive and delusory in trying to skate the questions I have posed.

Therefore, let's put this in the form of the hypothetical, to help you step outside of your desire to elude answering my questions, shall we?

Let's assume that you and I were dialoguing on the Hannity forum.

You said something like, "I don't think gay people should be discriminated against."

Then I come back with, "That's because you are probably a homo. Your biased fag-loving position does not count in this discussion."

Should my comments be banned for this statement?

My personal opinion is that they should.

Now, let's assume you agree. You report to the moderator that I am using pejoratives to debate you. Specifically, I call you a "fag-lover".

The moderator reviews the thread and decides that the comments are in fact not bannable because the forum has a VERY SPECIFIC LIST of bannable words, and "fag" is not one of them.

So you mention that it SHOULD be a bannable word, and again, the moderator tells you that it is not, and bans you for being a "smart-ass".

How, in this HYPOTHETICAL situation, would you say that these actions reflect up the moderators of Mr. Hannity's web forum?

It's really a VERY simple scenario. I'm not saying this is what happened to me. I'm not saying it HAS EVER happened to ANYONE, ANYWHERE.

I'm saying attempt to use your imagination, and comment upon this STRICTLY HYPOTHETICAL scenarion. Are you capable of doing that? I feel pretty certain that you are.

But I bet that you won't. If you do, you won't address the premises of my questions. "You'll simply say that since they are the moderators, they are the bosses, and what they say goes. And even if it were wrong, it would have no reflection upon Mr. Hannity or his credibility."

I challenge you to answer honestly.

"You didn't get onto ML for "hate speech". Saying "redneck" is hate speech. "

You're absolutely right. And although I'm not the moderator of this website, I agree with you. So I'm correcting that oversight right now.

Meyer London, you were wrong to call Sean Hannity's webforum a "redneck site". "Redneck" is not a good choice of words. Although, I don't consider it hate speech, some people do take offense to it, and therefore it would be nice if you would choose some other descriptive term in the future.

There. See. I can be agreeable.

Can you?

You liberals trip me out. Always pissing, whining and moaning ... get a grip! Quit being such a fag!! You sound like a two year old child, whining about such silly little garbage, drivel drivel drivel I think I hear a violin playing in the background. My a-hole bleeds for you, baby.

For the record, I've been to the Hannity website many, many times and NEVER seen them allow hate speech, so piss off. That's why I come here, so I can call liberals what they really are, pissy little whiny bitchy moany babies.

Go cry to momma.

>"It depends on how it is used."
WRONG! FOR THE HUNDREDTH TIME

No, I'm not. In fact, I used the word, and you didn't get on to me about it. That's because I used it in an appropriate way. Here's what I wrote:

>>If I have to explain to you how the word "fag" can be used without malice, you need help.<<

See. I used the word without ANY malice.

>I challenge you to answer honestly.

Here it is. If used in a malicious way, it should be banned. As I have already demonstrated, I used the word "fag" in a sentence and it was not malicious. I have no reason to believe the word was used maliciously just because you claim it was.

question
is fag one of them
words that homos
can call themselves
but the rest of us can't
sorta like blacks can
call each other niggers
but non-blacks cant

Go to the Sean Hannity forum and find an appropriate thread. Then post something like say,

"I think Bill Clinton is a fag."

See if they allow it to stand.

I'd do it myself, but I've already been banned.

>WRONG! FOR THE HUNDREDTH TIME

"No, I'm not."

For like the dozenth time in this thread you have neglected to address the following:

"The moderator CLEARLY STATED that the use of the word (FAG) is NOT BANNABLE!"

"Here it is. If used in a malicious way, it should be banned. As I have already demonstrated, I used the word "fag" in a sentence and it was not malicious. I have no reason to believe the word was used maliciously just because you claim it was."

Here you go "observer". Just for you sweetheart.


http://www.hannity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5041&postdays=0&postorder=desc&highlight=fag&start=25&sid=5521b70be18fef16a860a58aec4740f0

Whoa! I just log on for today and what's the first thing of significant EV I see? C&P screens. Between you and Hex, EV has been taken to a new level.

OK. You get points for continuing to argue a dead subject and taking whinning, moaning and bitching about nothing to a new level. Also the rugged connect-the-unrelated-dots was a nice touch. But adding a conspiracy theory and some more flavorable anger to your language could win you the EV Grand Prize. I would have to say you are in the running with this particular thread. A little fine tuning and you'll be there.

And welcome to the contest.

Sean Hannity advocates hate speech. No one who has posted here today has contested this fact.

Even the last guy "thanx" claims that calling someone a "fag" is, in his own words, "a dead subject" and "whinning, moaning and bitching about nothing".

You Republicans are class acts, I must hand it to you. Your repudiated insensitivity and abject idiocy take the cake.

Well, I guess that about sums it up.

So in your own little world you preceive you won a battle. Like you would have believed otherwise? Nope. You had your mind made up before you ever logged onto Hannity's website. Quit being a flammer. Grow up.

Stop whining like a bitch, stupid commie pinko faggot.