3 ms·
> So, you're not free to speak. But everywhere has some practical limits on free speech. It's a question of where the line is drawn. Shouting 'fire' in a crowd
by radio4fan 13y ago
> So, you're not free to speak.
But everywhere has some practical limits on free speech. It's a question of where the line is drawn. Shouting 'fire' in a crowded theatre, threatening the President, you get the picture.
Of course we're not all going to agree on where the line should be drawn, and some would like there to be no line at all. You can't please everyone.
In France and Germany, it's illegal to deny that the holocaust happened, but it's not in the UK or Spain, for example.
> Because somebody else gets to decide what's "hate speech".
We decide what is hate speech, through our elected representatives. It's far from perfect, but it's the better than all the alternatives.
- guard-of-terra 13y agoThe alternative of unrestricted free speech is better.
- hahainternet 13y agoWhy? I prefer to live in a society where people can't march through the streets waving signs designed specifically to vilify a specific group. Can you tell me how this freedom makes your society better in any way?
- guard-of-terra 13y agoI see a huge value in political protest. It allows a society to figure out its problems. You suggest to sweep problems under the rug until they go real bad and even, in the competitive world, ruin the society's chances forever. Why would people do what you describe? Because they are pure evil? What if they occassionally do have a point?
- hahainternet 13y agoYou post a load of conjecture that is purely hypothetical and then ask questions from this non-existent world. You do not comprehend the reality you are discussing. Screaming 'GOD HATES FAGS' at someone's funeral is not political protest. It is disgusting psychological abuse.
- guard-of-terra 13y agoScreaming at somebody's funeral should be punishable without the need of referring the content of screams in question.
- coldtea 13y ago"""I prefer to live in a society where people can't march through the streets waving signs designed specifically to vilify a specific group. Can you tell me how this freedom makes your society better in any way?""" For one, what if that specific group makes life worse for the others, so it's rightly villified? Then it would be important that their complaint is known. Second, even if what they say in their "signs" is wrong, I better publicly KNOW that there are people that think this way, and take precautions, that have them do it in secret. Third, it never stops there. It opens an Overton Window that makes speaking freely all the more difficult.
- hahainternet 13y ago> For one, what if that specific group makes life worse for the others, so it's rightly villified? Then it would be important that their complaint is known. Sorry what? That's like saying we should listen to the KKK because after all they do make life worse for others!