NationStates Jolt Archive

Inspired by that 'forsakethetroops' thread

It should be as free as free can be.

I don't beleive in limits on speech except to ban false statements that are likely to get people injured or killed. For example I would be in favor of censoring a book that says eight glasses of water per day will cure infectious diseases because not only isn't it true, but people who follow the book's advice will spread potentially fatal diseases to others.

Free speech is fine. Blatant lies like 'the holocaust never happened' are good arguments for corporal punishment and should be eliminated, preferably through education but I am not overly fussy if a few kicks are administered during the process.

How free is speech in the US?

free as long as it avoids slander and copyright infringement

It has to be free enough for me to say that you can not say that.

How free is speech in the US?

I don't really know. So I had to settle for 'those I agree with'

I had to vote on something, it is my stupid, unchangeable poll.

free as long as it avoids slander and copyright infringement

Depends on whether it is political speech, commercial speech (nike v kesky), or hate speech.

I love it. Free speech that is. That's kind of my point in starting that thread. I admire that this fella has an opinion and is so willing to proclaim it. It can seem so foriegn yet it's here at home in our own country. I find it despicable yet it's wonderful to see that even jacks like this can still speak their mind.
I mean this guys got guts. He's poking the U.S. Armed Forces in the eye. These guys are all trained to be deadly with weapons for crying out loud.

Prob with totally free speech is stuff like what happened in Rwanda. The national radio was actually encouraging people of a certain origin (hutu/tutsi)to go and kill those of the other origin. In their defense in court, freedom of speech was invoked. Unsuccessfully. So, care is in order when advocating free speech.

Depends on whether it is political speech, commercial speech (nike v kesky), or hate speech.

Hate speech is legal in the US.

I will defend any American's right to say what ever they want. But I will also defend everyone elses right to respond to what that person says.

Hate speech is legal in the US.

up to a limit, right?

Depends on whether it is political speech, commercial speech (nike v kesky), or hate speech.
does it?

i was thinking of flat out lies like "quagmire kidnapped the lindbergh baby" which, if believed, might damage you.

does it?

i was thinking of flat out lies like "quagmire kidnapped the lindbergh baby" which, if believed, might damage you.

ask a real lawyer.

the nike v kesky case was basically about nike claiming their workers were fine, which they were not, and nike's statement was held to be advertising, thereby commercial speech, whereas they said: hey, free speech free country, we have rights you know...

Settled for millions

I draw the line at:
Copyright Infringment
Slander
Direct Incitement to Crime

Most of the usual caveats have already been covered, but I didn't see one that handled untrue speech that can lead others into a dangerous situation, i.e. yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.

I'm less worried about copyright infringement than others, which is odd since I'm a writer and probably should be, but I've seen the lengths to which Disney has gone to continually extend their copyright on Mickey Mouse and it's left the public domain basically meaningless now. If Disney has anything to say about it--and with the money they pour into Congress, they will, anything copyrighted in the last 75 years and from here on out will never enter the public domain, and that's just shitty.

Most of the usual caveats have already been covered, but I didn't see one that handled untrue speech that can lead others into a dangerous situation, i.e. yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.

You can yell "fire" in a crowded Theater... you can Slander and Libel someone, you can plagerize and even violate Copywrited material...

You just have to accept the consequences of such actions. Most people don't because they don't want the consequences (i.e. Jail time, Lawsuites...).

When Sinead O'Connor tore the picture of the POPE on SNL... I will defend her right to do so. but I will also defend everyone else's right to Boo her off any stage she tries to get upon, to pull all financial backing/break contracts because of what she did. Same with the Dixie Chicks... Same with the Beatles...

Freedom of Speech does not mean Freedom from Consiquences, it means the Government cannot censor you, but they won't stop others from responding... within the confines of the law that is.

Totally free. Let anyone talk about anything they want to. To stop any type of speech shows a lack of strength on your part, IMO. If someone tells me to "$%&@ off", I just ignore it. If Strom Thurmond says blacks should stay segregated, it just shows me how ignorant he is. Not censoring someone's words lets you know the person better.

up to a limit, right?

Not really no. Other than non-hate speech has limits also.

The sine qua non of freedom of speech is that you cannot address the content of speech, only the results. Thus, if you start to go down the "hate" speech path you are forced to evaluate the claims therein.

This leads to censorship of opinion. A bad thing.

The best redress of bad speech is more speech! We are a marketplace of ideas.

"I'm less worried about copyright infringement than others"

The fact that you may not worry about dogs defacating on your lawn doesn't make it OK, nor does it mean that no one else has a right to worry.

Free with the following restrictions:

Does not cause direct harm to a person(I.E. Slander, Copyright infringement)
Done with intent to harm(Yelling FIRE! in a crowded theater)
Non-idle threats

Basically, anything said that is likely to cause direct harm to another person.

The sine qua non of freedom of speech is that [B]you cannot address the content of speech, only the results[B]. Thus, if you start to go down the "hate" speech path you are forced to evaluate the claims therein.

This leads to censorship of opinion. A bad thing.

The best redress of bad speech is more speech! We are a marketplace of ideas.

Spot-on! I've agreed with you twice tonight. My aim must be improving.

Totally free.

How much would it suck to have to pay to talk? ;)

How free is speech in the US?

LOL, depends....how much corporate cash do you have for airtime?

I didn't vote because I want it both more free and less free than in the US. I feel a culture of fear when expressing my opinion against the current administration. I may be safe behind my computer screen, but voicing my opinion in public is a bit scarier, especially if I know I'm in a minority. However, I find it revolting that Nazis are allowed to publish things that are considered illegal in Germany in the name of Freedom of Speech.

I will defend any American's right to say what ever they want. But I will also defend everyone elses right to respond to what that person says.
Respond how?

You can yell "fire" in a crowded Theater... you can Slander and Libel someone, you can plagerize and even violate Copywrited material...

You just have to accept the consequences of such actions. Most people don't because they don't want the consequences (i.e. Jail time, Lawsuites...).

When Sinead O'Connor tore the picture of the POPE on SNL... I will defend her right to do so. but I will also defend everyone else's right to Boo her off any stage she tries to get upon, to pull all financial backing/break contracts because of what she did. Same with the Dixie Chicks... Same with the Beatles...

Freedom of Speech does not mean Freedom from Consiquences, it means the Government cannot censor you, but they won't stop others from responding... within the confines of the law that is.


That is what freedom of speech is about. How can speech be free if it involves consequences? How about the (imaginary) guy speaking well of al quaida on the radio? Or the one speaking ill of the government? At some point they step over a line. Deciding where that line is defines freedom of speech.

Saying that freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences is a paradox.

You can say what you want but if I don't like it I will imprison you?

So Laerod, your right to say something is more important then my right just because we do not agree on something? I love that, I want to say what I want but I do not want others to say things because it might offend me.

Whether a society can succesfully handle 'Freedom of speech' is largely dependent on respect for the general social codes that most people seem to be able to abide by - i.e. present your opinion in such a way as not to offend others, with an awareness that it is not the only opinion on the table. It's pretty tricky in practice though. The new laws/legislation on 'incitement to religious hatred' in the UK is a good example of where the lines have got a bit blurred.
However, I'm in China right now where the debate on freedom of speech has totally different parameters...

If someone doesn't have the ability to control their own bodies because someone on the radio tells them to kill people, they don't have the ability to fulfil their social contract, and as such lose rights. And should probably be institutionalised.

Although I think there should be some impartial body to publish official documents....not everybody has the time or ability to cross-reference the reliability and truthfulness of any given report.

LOL, depends....how much corporate cash do you have for airtime?
Freedom of expression has little to do with freedom to be heard.

free as long as it avoids slander and copyright infringement

Or unnecessary panic, such as yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater when there is no fire, for example.

How free is speech in the US?Not as free as the government would like you to think.



I did not say that. Moving along...


~Czardas, Supreme Ruler of the Universe