Thread: Limits to free speech?

Originally Posted by PatrickT

.

{{""Free speech does not mean I'm free to say whatever I want. If I call my boss an idiot he is free to fire me.""}}

But you were free to call him an idiot!! Him firing you was his right. As I said,you are free to say anything you want as long as your willing to except the consequence.

{{""If my wife asks if her butt looks big and I answer, "Whooooeeeee!" I can expect retribution.""}}

But you were free to say it. (your making my point for me.)

{{"" In the state in which I lived there was an affirmative defense for assault called "fighting words". If someone ragged you enough the courts would acquit you of assault for smacking them silly. That is not a violation of free speech.The First Amendment does not protect me from my neighbor. Criminal law does.""}}

I'm glad your state has that law, some staes don't. They try to say, "words don't hurt you".

{{""But, I am protected by the Constitution from the government and that's a fact that especially this current government hates. That's why we hear about the "seriously flowed Constirtution." The government hates private property rights, free speech, protection of relgiion, the right to bear arms. I think it's wrong but the government has gotten rid of the prohibition on double jeopardy""}}

AMEN to that!!!

{{""Free Speech must be protected. Especially speech we don't like. If we're all free to say what the government wants to hear then we're slaves. It reminds me of basic training. "Are we all happy to be marching in the freezing rain?" "Yes Sir!" "I can't hear you." "YES SIR""}}

Aren't we in agreement there, YES SIR!!! We have no problems, PatrickT, we are in comlete agreement.

Originally Posted by MegadethFan

The reality is that speech does do harm to others in some circumstances and I think these instances ought to be mitigated by the state. Do you agree?

I would say the person seeking to limit the speech would have to demonstrate that harm to the satisfaction of society.

Originally Posted by GeneralZod

Free speech does not even work on this forum. Try it for yourself. Say (*)(*)(*)(*)!

You're free to say it. The forum is free to not publish it.

I agree … I think it’s about time people speak their minds and let the chips fall where they may. Maybe after some people start experiencing the consequences and the affects of their own other words, only then will they start engaging brain before mouth.

“Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth.”
~ Mike Tyson

Long live free speech

Originally Posted by Cigar

I agree … I think it’s about time people speak their minds and let the chips fall where they may. Maybe after some people start experiencing the consequences and the affects of their own other words, only then will they start engaging brain before mouth.



Long live free speech

Amen, brother!

Originally Posted by beenthere

{{""Free speech does not mean I'm free to say whatever I want. If I call my boss an idiot he is free to fire me.""}}

But you were free to call him an idiot!! Him firing you was his right. As I said,you are free to say anything you want as long as your willing to except the consequence.

{{""If my wife asks if her butt looks big and I answer, "Whooooeeeee!" I can expect retribution.""}}

But you were free to say it. (your making my point for me.)

{{"" In the state in which I lived there was an affirmative defense for assault called "fighting words". If someone ragged you enough the courts would acquit you of assault for smacking them silly. That is not a violation of free speech.The First Amendment does not protect me from my neighbor. Criminal law does.""}}

I'm glad your state has that law, some staes don't. They try to say, "words don't hurt you".

{{""But, I am protected by the Constitution from the government and that's a fact that especially this current government hates. That's why we hear about the "seriously flowed Constirtution." The government hates private property rights, free speech, protection of relgiion, the right to bear arms. I think it's wrong but the government has gotten rid of the prohibition on double jeopardy""}}

AMEN to that!!!

{{""Free Speech must be protected. Especially speech we don't like. If we're all free to say what the government wants to hear then we're slaves. It reminds me of basic training. "Are we all happy to be marching in the freezing rain?" "Yes Sir!" "I can't hear you." "YES SIR""}}

Aren't we in agreement there, YES SIR!!! We have no problems, PatrickT, we are in comlete agreement.

Beenthere, you have no point. According to you, I'm free to murder you if I'm willing to accept the consequences. I'm free to rape and pillage if I'm willing to accept the concequences. That is not freedom at all.

You are free to say the President is a fool if you're willing to go to prison for twenty years. That's patently stupid, Beenthere. "The government shall pass no laws...abridging...." It's not a difficult sentence. It's not a difficult concept. It's simply a concept that statists, usually on the left, can't accept.

There should be no restrictions on speech. Unless your directly slandering someone it's inexcusable for government to be censoring media and opinion.

Hate speech is often restricted on television and radio in this country but whats the point? If you want to access hateful information visit the internet.

People in my country are whinging about the Australian Parties anti-gay adverts that recently came out. Saying it's homophobic and inappropriate. Well why is that reason to restrict it? If it's offensive to the majority then it will just obscure and cast that political party into nothingness.

Letting idiots not look like idiots is insane. How are we supposed to vote for politicians when they can't expose there real political opinion?

It's driving Australian politics in a direction when it should be free and open and left to it's own devices.

Censorship is stupid!

Originally Posted by DarkDaimon

The problem I have with limiting speech because it "harms" someone is that injury done by speech does not leave any tell-tale signs like bruising and broken bones so it is hard to tell if someone was actually harmed. This makes it too easy to abuse. What is to stop a politician from saying that the disclosure of his affair "harmed" his family? How can we prove that a corporation wasn't "harmed" by a bad review of their product? What if the KKK said that they were harmed by being called racists? As you see, it becomes a double-edged sword.

On top of that, such a rule would destroy the stand-up comic industry over night. Shows like South Park, the Simpsons and Family Guy would no longer exist.

The worse part would be we would become a society of mice, no longer willing to speak out for something we believe in for fear that it might offend someone.

Exactly. We are responsible for our words, but we should not be criminally responsible.

Originally Posted by MegadethFan

But the difference with all of these is as I described - the 'in good faith' argument.

But you can't prove that.

You mention the pollies affair because it goes to his character as a leader.

But it still inflicts psychological harm, does it not? And if that's your standard... well.

You criticize the company but it isnt a person so it doesn't matter

.

How about all the people who work for the company and who depend on it for a paycheck?

You criticize the KKK, but its true, not fake.

Gay men still contract AIDS at a higher rate than the general population. Therefore male homosexual sex is more dangerous than heterosexual sex. True, not fake. Can I say this and be OK under your reasonable limits?

Originally Posted by GeneralZod

Free speech does not even work on this forum.

Try it for yourself. Say (*)(*)(*)(*)!

This forum is private property. The owners are under no obligation to allow you to post whatever you like. In fact, you are the one who is obliged to comply with the forum's TOS in order to utilize this private property.

Now if the government stepped in and told the owners of this forum that they must censor the naughty words? There's your infringement.