Thank you for providing an actual argument.
As we have witnessed in many places, these stuff isn't always outlawed. In places where these views can be expressed more freely, it either escalate to the point where someone is hurt, or they gain enough popularity that it becomes almost impossible to stop. I believe that the best way to deal with the problem is to address it quickly head on when we know this is universally abhorrent.
This law seems to be explicitly in place to avoid people getting hurt. You have not provided any argument at all how it doesn't.
Are you worried about being jailed for Nazi views? So you should be, and consider yourself lucky. I'd rather have you jailed for a month to hopefully learn your lesson that we don't take to hatred and violence lightly, than to allow you a platform to gather support so you can hurt and kill millions.
I don't think the killing them all part is necessarily a motivator. Perhaps more so that solar and wind have become price competitive, and that investing in renewables have the additional benefit of helping China lead in these crucial areas.
Tolerance of intolerance is not a path to freedom. Choosing to do nothing will only mean that rights and freedoms will be destroyed. Call this the lesser of two evils if you must.
If you let intolerance fester, it will grow and take control, then it will start hurting and squeezing others. It'd be foolish to sacrifice freedom in the name of freedom.
An unusual counterpoint. The 'krompomat' the Russians wasn't really proven, and at this stage I think if they threaten him with releasing whatever Trump can just go 'LOL like I give a fuck. You seen the shit I did to their face? They still voted for me!'
This would be a fun bit of justice porn after seeing Trump get away with everything.
I don't think you can pardon a civil case?
On the other hand, it might just be the first sign of the naked corruption we can expect to see more of.
No, the path to an election win isn't to appeal to the far right cult and hope that enough of them switch sides. They appealed to people switching sides this election and it failed miserably.
Some ways needs to be found to energise your own base, and find a crisis to run on, real or exaggerated.
There are many other things too of course, but this isn't an essay. Last thing I'd say is that just because one side embraced lunacy, it doesn't mean the other side has to
When people have moved to leaving candy out, perhaps kids thought that not having them out means you're not participating. Also, when many houses have left them out, for efficiency, it makes sense to only go to those houses.
I'm glad to hear that the sign helped. Shows that some kids aren't just about getting as much candy as possible but also having a bit of fun.
Most people understand others have things to do. At least you explained the might shift part.
If this happens, push the ball of your feet up. The ball of you feet is the front of your foot connected to the toes, helped me many times.
There is a difference between authoritarianism and having laws to protect your citizens. Authoritarians have laws to protect the regime, not the citizens.
No one is being jailed for being a Nazi when you say you have issues with immigration policies, nor are people being jailed for being a communist for saying they want socialized healthcare.
You have to draw the line somewhere and say that something is dangerous and illegal, and I think saying you support Nazis and want to do Nazi stuff is a pretty good line.
I know this won't change your mind, but even as you continue to disagree with this, I hope you can see why this isn't a definitively wrong thing to do.