Originally posted by Silent MasterI think hate speech is pretty well defined in law everywhere. I think the problem is some people are trying to stretch free speech to include the unacceptable.
The problem is, a lot of people are trying to stretch those limitations to cover opinions they disagree with and would have no problems with having people arrested for what they deem as "hate speech".
Originally posted by Silent MasterI think that's a complicated topic which still hasn't been addressed objectively here, all to often we've all turned it into an emotive troll fest, myself included.
Again, depends on what is being called unacceptable. because plenty of people out there want things like using the wrong pronoun to be considered unacceptable.
Originally posted by Silent Masteragain, I think context is key... aims, history, etc. Too late for me and this tonight and the Mrs is back from seeing her mum in Ghana tomorrow so, I won't be on. Enjoyed this exchange mate. See, we don't have to troll each other always.
Is it complicated though? I'm fairly sure most people here would agree that it shouldn't be illegal to "misgender" someone or to have a different political opinion.
Originally posted by Putinbot1I didn't say there are no limitations on free speech. I said you are allowed to belittle someone. You are allowed to be racist or sexist. You are allowed to push conspiracy theories that are just plain stupid. You are not allowed to threat someone, engage in false advertising, libel and defamation, purgery, dissemination of classified material, etc. Do you see the difference?
Really? I totally question if there is such a thing as the absolute right to free speech? It existed when we were cavemen and complex human society had yet to form, and maybe it will exist when radical anarchists rule the world. But collectively, we already know and agree that such an absolute freedom does not, and cannot, exist. Slander, publicly teaching people how to make a bomb, yelling in Trafalgar Square about wanting to kill the queen: these are examples of speech that we do not condone as a society and for which there are legal repercussions. If “free speech” means the unfettered ability to say whatever one wants without facing any consequences or restrictions, it cannot exist. Or if it does, it exists in a matrix of other rights and freedoms, such as the right to physical and psychological safety
Originally posted by Putinbot1I would have to see the metrics by which you measured that... But that's also strictly talking about the press which in America is driven by corporations... I thought we were talking about state censorship not self censorship.
Question: why does the US rate lower than so many European countries including the UK in terms of press freedom guys?
Originally posted by SamZEDAmericans don't get arrested, or our homes raided, for posts on social media.
By Europe I mean UK, Germany and other countries where free speech is an actual real thing.
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2016/04/07/police-raid-social-media-posts/
Originally posted by Badabing
Americans don't get arrested, or our homes raided, for posts on social media.https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2016/04/07/police-raid-social-media-posts/
If you say so...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/18/facebook-comments-arrest-prosecution
Originally posted by jaden_2.0Thanks for showing me those articles. I never heard of one.
If you say so...https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/18/facebook-comments-arrest-prosecution
Not really the same since your articles seem to pertain to threats of violence and my articles were about "hate speech". But still startling nonetheless, especially since one article shows the man was charged as a terrorist.
Well, I guess we surpassed Orwell's 1984 with thought crimes and went right into Minority Report and pre-crime.
Edit: The powers that be are just crapping all over our Bill of Rights.
Originally posted by Badabing@Jaden, cheers for that like Bada says, very revealing. To be honest, for me free speech I'm sure has never existed in modern times. I don't see how the world could work with it, when some people choose to use it as something to hide behind to spew hate.
Thanks for showing me those articles. I never heard of one.Not really the same since your articles seem to pertain to threats of violence and my articles were about "hate speech". But still startling nonetheless, especially since one article shows the man was charged as a terrorist.
Well, I guess we surpassed Orwell's 1984 with thought crimes and went right into Minority Report and pre-crime.
Edit: The powers that be are just crapping all over our Bill of Rights.