Debates
16 Aug 17
- Joined
- 15 Oct 10
- Moves
- 98630
The Freedom of Speech enshrined in the Constitution is a prohibition on the restriction of speech applied exclusively to the government.
Thus, for example, it does not prohibit the management of Google from finding speech which stands in opposition to its Management's company policy to be behavior subject to discipline, even termination.
While I agree with Google's management in this instance the point I'm making is that this is not a true Freedom of Speech issue as the government is not involved. If they were I would feel differently
Originally posted by @divegeesterI would answer but first I need a safe zone.
If freedom of speech is a right, then how come automod always deletes my posts when I'm telling Robbie Carrobie what I think of him?
Serious point: freedom of speech is an ideal, and like all ideals it is pretty much misunderstood and impossible to uphold.
17 Aug 17
Originally posted by @divegeesterPretty sure Russ is as far left as it gets. I think he's boning the d.
If freedom of speech is a right, then how come automod always deletes my posts when I'm telling Robbie Carrobie what I think of him?
Serious point: freedom of speech is an ideal, and like all ideals it is pretty much misunderstood and impossible to uphold.
17 Aug 17
Originally posted by @kquinn909Always the interesting contribution to informed debate.
Pretty sure Russ is as far left as it gets. I think he's boning the d.
Freedom of speech is nothing but an ideal.
It's as free as the authorities allow it to be.
It just sounds good to say you are all for it.
But you are not.
You can't have society saying everything it wants. You can't have individuals saying anything they want. That would lead to bullying, lying, etc.
Freedom of speech, what's usually meant, is press freedom: the freedom to investigate and report on your findings, without prosecution.
17 Aug 17
2 edits
Originally posted by @shavixmirTrue but Americans can't see society. The language of individual rights occupies an abstract space in which concepts like that have no place. Corporations and the wealthy have rights but no social responsibilities. Therefore they have bought up the democratic system.
Freedom of speech is nothing but an ideal.
It's as free as the authorities allow it to be.
It just sounds good to say you are all for it.
But you are not.
You can't have society saying everything it wants. You can't have individuals saying anything they want. That would lead to bullying, lying, etc.
Freedom of speech, what's usually meant, is press freedom: the freedom to investigate and report on your findings, without prosecution.
Americans do have a society in which people can say anything they want and they have Trump for president, Bannon to guide him, Pence as vice-president and an awful lot of weapons systems primed for action.
Originally posted by @wajomaIt's not a human right.
Freedom of speech is a human right, and as a right it is an ideal. How finnegan managed to turn this into yet another anti-US drool fest shows the limits of his imagination.
It's a misunderstood concept, sold to you as a right.
You have the right to safety, you have the right to food & water, you have a right to housing.
You have the right not to be bullied, not be unduly persecuted and not to be slandered.
You cannot have those rights if someone has the right to say whatever the hell they like about you.
It wouldn't work.
Hence that the freedom of speech generally refers to reporting without persecution.
Originally posted by @shavixmirawww did someone say some mean things about you shav.
It's not a human right.
It's a misunderstood concept, sold to you as a right.
You have the right to safety, you have the right to food & water, you have a right to housing.
You have the right not to be bullied, not be unduly persecuted and not to be slandered.
You cannot have those rights if someone has the right to say whatever the hell they li ...[text shortened]... n't work.
Hence that the freedom of speech generally refers to reporting without persecution.
A right is the sovereignty to act without the permission of others. You've got the 'rights' things all back to front shav. You don't have a right to food in that you have a right to force others to provide you with food, or safety or water for that matter. Because you see you'd be violating their rights.
Of course people can say whatever the hell they like about you with one provision, it can't be untrue. That is the limit on free speech, i.e. false speech, defamation, yelling fire when there's no fire.
So if someone say's "Shav you're an idjit." That's all fine and true. It's not bullying or persecution, it's statement of fact.
Originally posted by @finneganThis may even all be true, but the resistance is gaining momentum finally. If we can get Steve Bannon out of the White House, I could start seeing a light at the end of the tunnel.
True but Americans can't see society. The language of individual rights occupies an abstract space in which concepts like that have no place. Corporations and the wealthy have rights but no social responsibilities. Therefore they have bought up the democratic system.
Americans do have a society in which people can say anything they want and they have ...[text shortened]... non to guide him, Pence as vice-president and an awful lot of weapons systems primed for action.
17 Aug 17
Originally posted by @suzianneI genuinely believe there is the basis for resistance in US society and I have many US Americans to admire.
This may even all be true, but the resistance is gaining momentum finally. If we can get Steve Bannon out of the White House, I could start seeing a light at the end of the tunnel.
I am not convinced that removing any one individual - Bannon say - changes anything, though that guy really is very dangerous. Until there is a genuine opposition to the neoliberal consensus and the nationalist consensus then the US will continue to horrify decent people eveywhere.
17 Aug 17
Originally posted by @wajomaThat is not the part that concerns me. The part that concerns me is that he left out Israel
Freedom of speech is a human right, and as a right it is an ideal. How finnegan managed to turn this into yet another anti-US drool fest shows the limits of his imagination.
Are you feeling OK Fin?
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29602
17 Aug 17
Originally posted by @wajomaPeople may indeed be free to say 'whatever' they want, but not 'wherever' they want.
awww did someone say some mean things about you shav.
A right is the sovereignty to act without the permission of others. You've got the 'rights' things all back to front shav. You don't have a right to food in that you have a right to force others to provide you with food, or safety or water for that matter. Because you see you'd be violating their ri ...[text shortened]... an idjit." That's all fine and true. It's not bullying or persecution, it's statement of fact.
At a tennis club for example, during a match, a spectator wouldn't be free to stand up and deliver a speech (even if speaking the truth). He would no doubt be thrown out, and rightly so. Freedom of speech comes with responsibility, especially in a social group.
So, linking to the OP, freedom of speech on RHP has to be within the confines of the terms of service. Being part of such a club necessitates the surrender of such a freedom.