4 ms·

Moral? The Hayes Codes is long gone. Tell me, if you were a lawyer, would you have defended the neo-nazis right to march down Skokie's Main Street where tons o

Moral? The Hayes Codes is long gone. Tell me, if you were a lawyer, would you have defended the neo-nazis right to march down Skokie's Main Street where tons of Holocaust survivors settled down after escaping Germany?

garbagetime 6y ago
>Tell me, if you were a lawyer, would you have defended the neo-nazis right to march down Skokie's Main Street where tons of Holocaust survivors settled down after escaping Germany? If I was a lawyer I would have done that if that's what I was employed to do. Hayes code seems irrelevant: what was being discussed was people feeling less positive about censorship when those who they thought were moral were being censored (rather than those thought to be immoral).
tomcam 6y ago
Hayes Code is not relevant here AFAIK but.. > would you have defended the neo-nazis right to march down Skokie's Main Street where tons of Holocaust survivors settled down after escaping Germany? I would do it in a heartbeat. Of course I detest racism. Of course I think those marches were an act of evil. But the test of a freedom-loving people is how we protect the despised, not how we protect the majority. If we don't protect the freedoms of those we dislike, we will lose our own freedoms soon enough.
- claudiawerner 6y ago
  There's an argument to be made that some things which are considered freedoms should not be considered freedoms because they can result in harm. At what point does protecting one exercise of one right of the despised outweigh the consequences of those actions? It's not about the people we dislike, it's about how those people - or anyone - acts, and the results of those actions. I still disapprove regardless of who it is who wants to march under a Nazi banner. Maybe society should have concerns not only along the lines of freedom. Or at least, to integrate both positive and negative liberty. Other Western democratic nations have balanced freedom and dignity quite well.

garbagetime 6y ago

>Tell me, if you were a lawyer, would you have defended the neo-nazis right to march down Skokie's Main Street where tons of Holocaust survivors settled down after escaping Germany? If I was a lawyer I would have done that if that's what I was employed to do. Hayes code seems irrelevant: what was being discussed was people feeling less positive about censorship when those who they thought were moral were being censored (rather than those thought to be immoral).

tomcam 6y ago

Hayes Code is not relevant here AFAIK but.. > would you have defended the neo-nazis right to march down Skokie's Main Street where tons of Holocaust survivors settled down after escaping Germany? I would do it in a heartbeat. Of course I detest racism. Of course I think those marches were an act of evil. But the test of a freedom-loving people is how we protect the despised, not how we protect the majority. If we don't protect the freedoms of those we dislike, we will lose our own freedoms soon enough.

claudiawerner 6y ago
There's an argument to be made that some things which are considered freedoms should not be considered freedoms because they can result in harm. At what point does protecting one exercise of one right of the despised outweigh the consequences of those actions? It's not about the people we dislike, it's about how those people - or anyone - acts, and the results of those actions. I still disapprove regardless of who it is who wants to march under a Nazi banner. Maybe society should have concerns not only along the lines of freedom. Or at least, to integrate both positive and negative liberty. Other Western democratic nations have balanced freedom and dignity quite well.