4 ms·
Should it? Should free speech be extended beyond the bounds of government and if so doesn’t that contradict its original meaning by making the government restri
by Jcowell 5y ago
Should it? Should free speech be extended beyond the bounds of government and if so doesn’t that contradict its original meaning by making the government restrict who should and shouldn’t provide uncensored free speech?
- Eddy_Viscosity2 5y agoI said it was tricky. But, for example, there could be stronger laws against media which contains objectively provable lies.
- acallan 5y ago> there could be stronger laws against media which contains objectively provable lies this is a clear violation of the First Amendment, which makes it legal to publish lies.
- Eddy_Viscosity2 5y agoWhat about slander and libel laws or laws about claims made in advertisements?
- acallan 5y ago> What about slander and libel laws or laws about claims made in advertisements? Yep — here we're getting into Prior Restraint. It's both against the law to restrain free speech such as lies, but as you rightly point out, this speech can have other legal consequences.
- Eddy_Viscosity2 5y agoWell there we go, an established framework for how this could work. Legal consequences are good enough.
- HereIGoAgain 5y agoFree speech never began with governments. The 1st is a prohibition on government interfering with the freedom of speech. That's the problem with this whole debate, most people have everything backwards. Free speech is a concept, an ideal that underpins the entire concept of a healthy, free, fair and open society.