|
|||||||
| Coffee Lounge Talk amongst other community members. |
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Topic Tools | Rate Topic |
Oct 16, 03
|
|||
|
|||
|
Freedom of Speech
I just finished reading the "RACIST IN GOLF THREAD", and got me thinking about views on Freedom of Speech. So first off, who's a supporter of Freedom of Speech? Now in the case of the golfer at hand in the previous thread, does she have the right to express her views to the public no matter how racially fueled they are? Now if you believe she doesn't, where do you draw the lines? And aren't you dictating what an individual can think and do?
I personally think she has the right as a human being to express what ever views she may have. Do I agree with them? No. Do I believe she has the right to express herself? Yes I do. I feel once you start policing what people are allowed to say, you are putting constraints on your own expressions. Regardless of how hateful and obscene these views may be. "If we do not believe in freedom of speech of those we despise we do not believe in it at all..." - Noam Chomsky responses would be appreciated. 
|
|
Oct 16, 03
|
|||
|
|||
|
regardless of whether or not they get flamed for it, do they have the right to express that?
I don't feel that Freedom of Speech encompasses only what's PC. By limiting it to that you are taking way the freedom to express views that don't fall in line with present doctrines.
|
|
Oct 16, 03
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm all for freedom of speech but I have my limits and they are stated in this thread: http://www.fnk.ca/board/showthread.p...threadid=14854
|
|
Oct 16, 03
|
|||
|
|||
|
But by putting limits on what can be said, you are contradicting your initial statement of being for "Freedom of Speech". Although you hold a semi-Egalitarian view of the matter you are putting restraints on a given right. Where would these lines be drawn for the masses? What you seem to blur is defending the rights of freedom is different from defending the views.
|
|
Oct 16, 03
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'm all for freedom of speech, regardless of whether or not I agree with what is being said. If we allow people to say things that are racist or ill informed than it opens up the posibility for a dialogue to occur that will show that person the error of their thought process. In my opinion PC is the worst thing that liberals have ever gven us and is in no way actually a progresive policy.
|
|
Oct 16, 03
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Outside of this place you can say anything you like, state any opinion you like to me and I'll discuss it until the sun goes down. That more clear?
|
|
Oct 16, 03
|
|||
|
|||
|
I differentiate the two because I like what this place has become and don't want to have it screwed up by unnecessary comments that do nothing but cause ill feelings between members.
FnK has gone through that growing pain already, I do not wish to be a janitor again to clean up the mess a second time. If a user does not like those conditions that are set then they are more than welcome to leave. Outside in meatspace one is more responsible for their words and actions than when they spew them out behind the safety of a computer screen.
|
|
Oct 16, 03
|
|||
|
|||
|
But if it has become such a strong community wouldn't they be able to police themselves and take responsibility for such actions?
In other words freedom of speech does not exist at all on this board. In the attempt to create a little corner of paradise you've put handcuffs on yourself and others. By allowing these restrictions, you're leaving the door wide open for other restrictions to be placed, ie. jenny doesn't like people talking about car accidents because her parents were killed in one. Where do the limitations stop? Ps- by no means is this an attack, I'm merely playing devil's advocate, or am I?
|
|
Oct 16, 03
|
|||
|
|||
|
Be the Devil's Advocate all you want as I don't mind.
I stated the rules so you can live by them or leave. I thought that is a pretty simple concept to understand. I do believe that I have been a very fair moderator and have in fact censored/deleted very few threads in my 7000+ postings. That's all I have to state in regards to this issue as my viewpoints have been stated quite clearly in my other thread.
|
|
Oct 16, 03
|
|||
|
|||
|
The whole "freedom of speech" thing is an issue that will cause hella arguments. There is really no fine line to draw bewtween it. Tough issue to deal with and no matter what the person says it wont make everybody happy as everybody has different opinions on this. Like the golfer thing. Did she have a rite to say it? Well yes cause like we said "freedom of speech rite". Was what she said wrong? yes probably. Im not even gonna start to touch on this topic i think the whole freedom of speech crap is bullshit.
|
|
Oct 16, 03
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Egalitarian - State should suppress certain views and ideas. Totalitarian - All should be suppressed if not same as state. Here are three views on the topic, those are some pretty solid lines drawn. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
Oct 16, 03
|
|||
|
|||
|
i'm all for freedom of speech. although i can't say if i'm an egalitarian or liberterian.
i could care less what the golfer said. you can say anything, but if you do so, you have to be responsible for the fall-out against yourself. and although freedom is there, the fact is a backlash will occur, so it's really up to them to risk it. case in point: dixie chicks.
|
|
Oct 16, 03
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
Oct 16, 03
|
|||
|
|||
|
Freedom of speech is obviously essential to any credible electoral process. Censorship is the handmaiden of a police state. For those who enjoy life as we know it I say to you now, "Put up with the ignoramus' bullocks! It's a beautiful thing to see someone allowed to be wrong."
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -- Francois Voltaire
|
