Freedom of speech

Does it exist?


  • Total voters
    32
Status
Not open for further replies.

It exists to a point.

But there's limits that have been put on what's deemed acceptable, via both laws and social pressures, so some views are considered 'off limits' and those who hold them aren't free to air them, therefore genuine and complete free speech doesn't truly exist.

In the context of the Charlie Hebdo debate, I think it's a case of where the right to satirical comment becomes poking someone with a stick for the craic.
 
I wonder when the march will be organised against those that want to deny free speech and freedom of expression.
Right-wing English Defence League thugs attack Russell Brand book group – thinking comedian would be there
When will Cameron make a speech in parliament demanding action against those that are attacking people for discussing a book. Just heard May say she 'stands against those that want to deny free speech'. Why didn't she mention the EDL 'book burning' attack on a Newcastle upon Tyne book club?

There is free speech for some and attempted silence for others, if the message they are saying is not in tune with the message of the establishment.

They're too busy in Parliament today pressing the case to force internet service providers to make their customer's data accessible to authorities and stop encryption. That was the conclusion they drew from "the attack on free speech" last week in France: that it'd be best to crack down on free speech here.
 
The Koran Does Not Forbid Images of the Prophet
http://www.newsweek.com/koran-does-not-forbid-images-prophet-298298
Without wishing to offend those of all faiths who really believe in heaven etc., I fervently wish that Terrorist Martyrs have an afterlife just long enough to infrom them that there is no afterlife, no virgins, no paradise etc.

Especially not for them.Posted on another forum I use.
I might be wrong but I think the issue for them was that the cartoons of Mohammed were taking the piss out of him - ie him naked etc
 

Anything spiteful which is designed purely to incite rage from a set of people, any set of people, isn't right. 'Satire' often ends up being a cover word for piss taking offensive material.

Preaching hate and inciting people to kill is a step further than that. Any 'speech' which is directly correlated to killing innocents shouldn't happen, obviously. But I'd argue that goading people/taking the piss should be banned too, when the only point is to aggravate.
 
It does exist but like everything else its subject to humans being bad bellends.

Freedom of speech and expression is a basic human adult right but it needs to be tempered with a dollop of decency too.

Charlie Hebdo continually prodded Muslims with their cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad. This was despite it obviously generating deep feeling amongst many Muslims, it was only a matter of time before one of their extremist bells decided to take action. Was it justified? Of course not. But then it wasn't wise to draw nasty stuff about a deity which its followers are deeply against you even depicting their image, never mind sullying it.

The free speech thing is usually a shield used by absolute bellends to offend someone else with their small minded bigoted views. Take for instance anyone ever who called themselves a libertarian.

Those often shouting the loudest with their free speech stuff are the most hateful.

There's times and places when to say stuff and times and places when not to. You learn these basic qualities as you grow up usually with the aid of a smacked arse off a parent or a punch in the face off someone who offended.

Its fine to disagree or be contrary, but when you're invoking people wanting to actually kill you then you need to review what you're saying, or how you're saying it as you're going about it all wrong.

No doubt this free speech thing will be used as a vehicle by those with the most hateful views to hate some more on others.

When really its just that dollop of decency that's needed more than the words.

You've got free speech. Every single one of you reading this. Just use it wisely and as a force of good, for provoking deeper thought and understanding.

Not for hurting people's feelings because of your small minded views.

jarg preview. No pictures. 0/10.
 
Anything spiteful which is designed purely to incite rage from a set of people, any set of people, isn't right. 'Satire' often ends up being a cover word for piss taking offensive material.

Preaching hate and inciting people to kill is a step further than that. Any 'speech' which is directly correlated to killing innocents shouldn't happen, obviously. But I'd argue that goading people/taking the piss should be banned too, when the only point is to aggravate.

It's a peaceful religion though.......

islam-blasphemy.jpg
 
Disclaimer: based in American law, but since large portions of American law are based in common law:

Free speech is often mistaken for freedom to say what you want, when you want. This is a misunderstanding of the right.

Free speech is a limitation on government censorship, not private censorship.

Furthermore, all rights, even fundamental rights, only exist up to the point in which they infringe on another person's fundamental rights.

And finally, even fundamental rights can be limited within reason for public health and safety.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top