On: People should not be killed because of hate speech.
This argument is flawed, because there may be consequences to such speech, but it should not be condoned or sanctioned by a governing body.
Intent summary: Argue that even if hate speech has consequences, the government should not endorse or punish it in a way that leads to killing people.
jeffkloy
18h ago
On: Non-verbal adults should be allowed to use inappropriate language when using ...
According to ThriveUp Care and Speech-Language Pathologists, non-verbal adults should be allowed to use less-filtered language when using AAC devices so they can communicate authentically.
Intent summary: The contributor aims to justify allowing non-verbal adults to use less-filtered or potentially inappropriate language on AAC devices by citing expert and advocacy sources.
turkules
1d ago
On: People should not be killed because of hate speech.
I often see you agree.
Intent summary: The contributor aims to note perceived agreement from the other participant.
turkules
1d ago
On: People should not be killed because of hate speech.
You seem to be agreeing.
Intent summary: The contributor aims to point out that the other person appears to be agreeing with the stated position.
On: People should not be killed because of hate speech.
This argument is flawed, because there may be consequences to such speech, but it should not be condoned or sanctioned by a governing body.
Intent summary: Argue that even if hate speech has consequences, the government should not endorse or punish it in a way that leads to killing people.
jeffkloy
18h ago
On: Non-verbal adults should be allowed to use inappropriate language when using ...
According to ThriveUp Care and Speech-Language Pathologists, non-verbal adults should be allowed to use less-filtered language when using AAC devices so they can communicate authentically.
Intent summary: The contributor aims to justify allowing non-verbal adults to use less-filtered or potentially inappropriate language on AAC devices by citing expert and advocacy sources.
turkules
1d ago
On: People should not be killed because of hate speech.
I often see you agree.
Intent summary: The contributor aims to note perceived agreement from the other participant.
No evidence has been attached yet. Add sourced material to boost credibility.
1d ago
On: People should not be killed because of hate speech.
You seem to be agreeing.
Intent summary: The contributor aims to point out that the other person appears to be agreeing with the stated position.
turkules
1d ago
On: People should not be killed because of hate speech.
I agree, but not fully.
Intent summary: The contributor aims to express partial agreement with the position while signaling some reservations.
jmarshallwalker42
20d ago
On: Freedom of speech prevents government retribution, not private businesses.
Freedom of speech prevents government retribution, not private businesses.
Intent summary: The contributor aims to clarify the limits of freedom of speech regarding government and private businesses.
jmarshallwalker42
34d ago
On: People should not be killed because of hate speech.
I also agree.
Intent summary: The contributor expresses agreement with the position.
jmarshallwalker42
35d ago
On: People should not be killed because of hate speech.
I agree completely!
Intent summary: The contributor expresses agreement with the position on hate speech.
jmarshallwalker42
35d ago
On: People should not be killed because of hate speech.
I fully agree.
Intent summary: The contributor expresses agreement with the position that hate speech should not lead to violence.
jmarshallwalker42
53d ago
On: People should not be killed because of hate speech.
We should not be allowed to kill a person, regardless how reprehensible their speech may be.
Intent summary: The contributor asserts that we should not be allowed to kill a person, regardless how reprehensible their speech may be and seeks evidence-backed discussion.