7 ms·
Freedom of speech should be a civil right and I hope that’s the result of this. No entity should be allowed to censor speech.
by CyberRabbi 6y ago
Freedom of speech should be a civil right and I hope that’s the result of this. No entity should be allowed to censor speech.
- invalidusernam3 6y agoSo hacker news shouldn't be allowed to remove spam comments?
- CyberRabbi 6y agohacker news shouldn’t be allowed to censor legitimate information or dissenting political opinions, which is what is covered by the 1st amendment. It doesn’t mean you can literally say whatever you want, e.g. flood sites with spam.
- lozaning 6y agoWho gets to be the arbiter of "legitimate"?
- CyberRabbi 6y agoJudges do when a lawsuit happens under a civil rights violation case.
- amanaplanacanal 6y agoJudges, who are government employees, would get to determine what speech is legitimate and what is not? No thanks, I’ll take the current system.
- CyberRabbi 6y agoThat’s literally how all civil rights are enforced.
- amanaplanacanal 6y agoJudges can only enforce laws passed by Congress. “Congress shall make no law” seems like a much better plan to me.
- CyberRabbi 6y agoJudges do not enforce laws, they apply laws to specific situations, otherwise known as interpreting the law. “Congress shall make no law” is the text of the first amendment, which is in regard to limiting free expression, not expanding it.
- amanaplanacanal 6y agoWouldn’t Congress have to make a law for judges to step in here, though? I’m not sure what you are suggesting, exactly.
- CyberRabbi 6y agoNo. Congress makes a law that declares the right to free speech to be a civil right. Judges would naturally step in when there is a contested violation of that right, as they currently do in all civil rights disputes .
- UncleMeat 6y agoSo HN needs a judge to remove spam?
- CyberRabbi 6y agoNo. HN would be able to remove spam freely. A judge is only involved if the spammer wants to waste money on a lawsuit where they are likely to lose
- Kiro 6y agoWhat is being amended? Use terms that people understand, please. This is an international forum.
- CyberRabbi 6y agoHacker news operates in the US and if the 1st amendment were made a civil right, it would have to obey that law.
- codyswann 6y agoSo you can say whatever you want at your job without any repercussion from your employer? Yikes.
- CyberRabbi 6y agoIf you’re being sincere that’s a false characterization of the freedom of speech. It is not the ability to say whatever you want but it is the ability to share legitimate information or dissenting opinions, the former being the topic of OP. Employers should not be able to deny people their rights.
- ntsplnkv2 6y agoEmployers fire people all the time for comments on social media and they are well within their right to do so. Any suggestion otherwise is a violation of the company's freedom of speech.
- CyberRabbi 6y agoDid you read about how this thread is about making freedom of speech a civil right where its protections extend to private entities?
- ntsplnkv2 6y agoOf course, that's the topic - perhaps you should read my post, and realize the contradiction your idea creates that I clearly pointed out for you.
- CyberRabbi 6y agoIt’s not a contradiction unless you think employers should be able to violate the civil rights of their employees. Do you think making it illegal for employers to discriminate against their employees based on their race is a violation of the employers’ rights?
- Raptor22 6y agoI agree with you in principle, however in practice this has been hijacked to spread misinformation with potentially deadly results. This is a very nuanced issue IMO and the answers are not trivial.
- CyberRabbi 6y agoThe answer is trivial if you believe in the protection of civil rights.
- Raptor22 6y agoI believe in the protection of civil rights, but I also believe in the devastating effects of misinformation. We need to find a way to protect against the latter while affecting very little the former, but we're just not there yet.
- CyberRabbi 6y agoWhat devastating effects of misinformation are you referring to? I see no devastating effects of misinformation at all. Your negative worldview is not a reason to allow the civil rights of others to be violated.