Why is 'Freedom of Speech' so misunderstood?
- Thread starter twistedmic
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Alright, everyone who wants to quote me on this, just look up how Britain deals with it, and I more or less agree with that. Governments in the Western world are not nearly as deeply flawed or corrupt as people like to entertain themselves into believing. No, of course they're not perfect, but this obsession people have with thinking every government is a dictatorship waiting to happen is a little tiring.TheLaofKazi said:
Like I've said, this is not about a guy who simply says he hates black people, its about a guy who purposefully prays on people's ignorance and misfortune into having persecuting black people, or who does his utmost to bring together who genuinely think the same as him.
Why do you consider freedom of speech a higher priority than the safety of others? If a child is being verbally bullied at school, do you let the bully carry on because he has a right to freedom of speech? Or does the school have rules, implemented and carried out by imperfect human beings, which put the well-being of the bullied child above that of the bully?
What about sexual harassment in the work place? I mean hey, the guy's just saying what's on his mind - freedom of speech!
Of course, in those contexts, people are more inclined to side with you, but for no real reason, the idea of it being put on a national level makes everyone crap themselves.
Freedom of Speech is misunderstood because ignorant prats use it to further their own ends.
...But that's just how I see it...
...But that's just how I see it...
You also can insight a panic (yelling panic) or do anyhting that is detrimental to public safety.
Anyway I think its cause most people who bother to pull up their first amendment right shield (or really any right shield) dont bother to actually READ what they're using as a shield.
Anyway I think its cause most people who bother to pull up their first amendment right shield (or really any right shield) dont bother to actually READ what they're using as a shield.
Freedom of speech is a great thing, but too many people seem to think it resolves them of the responsibility and consequences of their words.
You have the freedom to drive a car too, or in the USA own a weapon. But if you injure somebody as a direct result of your actions you get arrested. The same needs to be true of speech. Words have enormous influence, and can cause harm, damage and death. People inciting violence cannot be allowed to hide behind 'freedom of speech'.
Recent UK example: the EDL, a far right extremist group, exercised their right to 'free speech' in my home town. I had nothing to do with them, but I through my council tax will be paying for the police and cleanup operations, and the hostility they implant amongst the Muslim residents towards white people will linger for months. Free speech? Only if people accept the consequences.
You have the freedom to drive a car too, or in the USA own a weapon. But if you injure somebody as a direct result of your actions you get arrested. The same needs to be true of speech. Words have enormous influence, and can cause harm, damage and death. People inciting violence cannot be allowed to hide behind 'freedom of speech'.
Recent UK example: the EDL, a far right extremist group, exercised their right to 'free speech' in my home town. I had nothing to do with them, but I through my council tax will be paying for the police and cleanup operations, and the hostility they implant amongst the Muslim residents towards white people will linger for months. Free speech? Only if people accept the consequences.
Sure, "people" do, but the question in play is: does the state? That's really the fundamental question of freedom of speech. Sure, the state won't come down on you, but if others want to dress you down for it, then they are well within their rights as well.Woodsey said:
Actually, you can say whatever the hell you want about the president, nothing is slander.
This means you CAN say Obama is a raving, psychotic, Nazi-loving maniac and easily get away with it.
Anyway, to answer your question, people are idiots. That's pretty much the answer to every single political question.
This means you CAN say Obama is a raving, psychotic, Nazi-loving maniac and easily get away with it.
Anyway, to answer your question, people are idiots. That's pretty much the answer to every single political question.
Not sure of the charges (I'm UK based) but I think it passed at the beginning of last yearSirBryghtside said:
If you are really interested, there are pages worth of details ehre:
http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?fn=/documents/bills28/bills/2006/4306/document1.htm
Simply stated everyone has the right to say something just as much as others have a right to tell them to STFU. Sometimes the STFU people are actually backed by the law and are doing so to protect the interest of other people that want to say things, or don't like what is being said about them.
I fully support free speech, and the kind I'm talking about is the slander, violence threat etc. because everyone has a right to say something, and if want they want to say goes against your ideals who gives a fuck?