4 ms·

> we're willing to pass laws and endure a certain level of self-censorship to avoid provoking violence out of these people Benjamin Franklin addressed that iss

by guylhem 14y ago

> we're willing to pass laws and endure a certain level of self-censorship to avoid provoking violence out of these people Benjamin Franklin addressed that issue "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Sometimes, I wonder what's the next target after free speech. I don't think farmers are a strategic objective. If I had to make that call, I'd go after woman rights, and trade that against something strategically insignificant concession (say like "allowing" farmers to keep raising pork). (EDIT: Fixed Franklin quote. human memory failure :-)

sliverstorm 14y ago
Quote him correctly: Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. It is important to do so; "essential liberty" and "temporary safety" are not the same as "liberty" and "safety".
- guylhem 14y ago
  You are right. My mistake. I fixed that. Freedom of speech is an essential liberty. The #1 most essential liberty, to allow science, progress and democracy
  - sliverstorm 14y ago
    At which point the discussion simply derails into a debate over whether you believe limitations to freedom of speech are ever acceptable. As another note, don't forget to consider the second element- "temporary safety". If the safety purchased by showing greater deference to militant Islamism is not temporary, the quote is not applicable. I am not arguing that this is the case, merely reminding to think critically- his quote was very specific, and it aggravates me when people abuse it without a moment's thought. Anyway, I know what I believe, but I don't have the material to make a case right now, so that is all.
    - hso9791 14y ago
      What safety is not temporary? And what liberty isn't essential? Writing style has changed over the centuries, to me this reads like he's also reminding us that liberty is essential, and safety is temporary - and that it always must be so.
      - sliverstorm 14y ago
        What safety is not temporary? Ok, you can be nit-picky and argue that no safety is truly timeless, but in that context the word "temporary" loses all meaning, as everything is temporary. Safety that lasts generations or for the duration of nations is clearly distinct from safety that lasts a season. What liberty isn't essential? Perhaps liberties that necessarily infringe on other people's liberties?
javajosh 14y ago
>Benjamin Franklin addressed that issue "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." I'm simply stating a fact, not making a judgement call. The main thrust of my comment was the lack of plain speaking in that article. It's not a very comfortable fact, but there it is: society often makes practical, rather than principled, choices about stuff like this. So, more about how I personally feel about it: I think it sucks that people get so infuriated when their religious figure or texts are abused or insulted. But it seems more practical to accept that the group has a mental problem, and to treat them with special care, than to provoke and punish when they act out. And what, after all, is so hard about not insulting Mohammad? Frankly, I think it's a genrally bad idea to insult anyone anyway, and while it's annoying in some abstract way that there is ONE GUY I really shouldn't insult...well, honestly, I don't feel all that oppressed by the prospect. >Sometimes, I wonder what's the next target after free speech. Well, first you're kind of tacitly assuming that all free speech has been destroyed by the islamists. It hasn't. A very narrow sliver of it has, and that's a shame, but let's not overstate the impact. The impurity of free speech is abhorrent - but what does this impurity get us? Attacked less? Saves some mentally unstable people some stress? Saves some lives maybe?
- robryan 14y ago
  What if something like the world being flat or everything revolving around the earth or any important scientific theory was that one thing you weren't free to express a viewpoint on, the problem would remain as no one would ever convince people that conventional wisdom is wrong. I think these protections around religion will mean that they will be the dominant thoughts on a lot of topics long after they otherwise would be relevant to those topics.

by guylhem 14y ago

sliverstorm 14y ago

Quote him correctly: Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. It is important to do so; "essential liberty" and "temporary safety" are not the same as "liberty" and "safety".

guylhem 14y ago
You are right. My mistake. I fixed that. Freedom of speech is an essential liberty. The #1 most essential liberty, to allow science, progress and democracy
- sliverstorm 14y ago
  At which point the discussion simply derails into a debate over whether you believe limitations to freedom of speech are ever acceptable. As another note, don't forget to consider the second element- "temporary safety". If the safety purchased by showing greater deference to militant Islamism is not temporary, the quote is not applicable. I am not arguing that this is the case, merely reminding to think critically- his quote was very specific, and it aggravates me when people abuse it without a moment's thought. Anyway, I know what I believe, but I don't have the material to make a case right now, so that is all.
  - hso9791 14y ago
    What safety is not temporary? And what liberty isn't essential? Writing style has changed over the centuries, to me this reads like he's also reminding us that liberty is essential, and safety is temporary - and that it always must be so.
    - sliverstorm 14y ago
      What safety is not temporary? Ok, you can be nit-picky and argue that no safety is truly timeless, but in that context the word "temporary" loses all meaning, as everything is temporary. Safety that lasts generations or for the duration of nations is clearly distinct from safety that lasts a season. What liberty isn't essential? Perhaps liberties that necessarily infringe on other people's liberties?

javajosh 14y ago

>Benjamin Franklin addressed that issue "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." I'm simply stating a fact, not making a judgement call. The main thrust of my comment was the lack of plain speaking in that article. It's not a very comfortable fact, but there it is: society often makes practical, rather than principled, choices about stuff like this. So, more about how I personally feel about it: I think it sucks that people get so infuriated when their religious figure or texts are abused or insulted. But it seems more practical to accept that the group has a mental problem, and to treat them with special care, than to provoke and punish when they act out. And what, after all, is so hard about not insulting Mohammad? Frankly, I think it's a genrally bad idea to insult anyone anyway, and while it's annoying in some abstract way that there is ONE GUY I really shouldn't insult...well, honestly, I don't feel all that oppressed by the prospect. >Sometimes, I wonder what's the next target after free speech. Well, first you're kind of tacitly assuming that all free speech has been destroyed by the islamists. It hasn't. A very narrow sliver of it has, and that's a shame, but let's not overstate the impact. The impurity of free speech is abhorrent - but what does this impurity get us? Attacked less? Saves some mentally unstable people some stress? Saves some lives maybe?

robryan 14y ago
What if something like the world being flat or everything revolving around the earth or any important scientific theory was that one thing you weren't free to express a viewpoint on, the problem would remain as no one would ever convince people that conventional wisdom is wrong. I think these protections around religion will mean that they will be the dominant thoughts on a lot of topics long after they otherwise would be relevant to those topics.