>>22
I'm tired of your arguing just for the sake of not conceding. I'll make this brief.
Especially if I myself state what I mean by calling Jews parasites.
Unless you are making a specific claim, ("John stole money"), the court is unlikely to even care.
If you are making a sweeping statement of an entire ethnic group, (ALL kikes/niggers steal), the court is even less likely to care.
Your argument for subjectivity fails in the concrete.
No court ever understood racial slurs and insults this way.
The onus is on you to provide proof otherwise.
For all your moronic bluster and confidence, you have yet to do so this entire argument. Not one case. However, you HAVE demonstrated that you do not understand basic concepts of American law (defamation, fraud, First Amendment), which leads me to believe that you are talking out of your ass. This dovetails nicely with most of your posts on this board.
As already stated (multiple times):
I claimed that a court doesn't legislate on ambiguities of possible offenses, (especially when they are pretty clearly insults/opinions, whether you want them to be or not). If you disagree further, the onus lies on you to prove that a court legislates in that manner, since I cannot prove that something never happened (logic 101). Until then, you continue to be full of shit. (The easiest way would be to bring an actual court case supporting your position. Tough to do when there aren't any, I know. But by your logic, these should be plentiful! So where are they?)