There is no such thing as Free Speech

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Aristotle, Oct 2, 2012.

  1. Aristotle
    Offline

    Aristotle Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Messages:
    1,599
    Thanks Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +125
    I have an issue with the idea of so-called "Free Speech." Philosophically, I do not believe in freedom of the will as I believe that we all are guided by something so action is neither independent, nor free of something. With that being said, I wanted to challenge the notion of Free Speech.

    Free Speech by definition, is the political right for one to express his/her views without fear of reprecussion. However in challenging this notion on freedom we are not necessarily free from reprecussion, rather, we are free as it is determined by law the extent of what is considered acceptable and not in violation of the law of the land. Although we are free to dislike president Obama we are not free to say that we will do harm to president Obama. In some cases it would be considered a threat even if we do not intend to harm the president.

    Similarly, one cannot yell out fire in a crowded movie theater if there is no fire. Proponents may argue that yelling fire even if it is a joke is still considered free speech. No it is not. In looking at this from a practical perspective if someone yells out fire simply to be comical, and to cause disturbance, someone may call the fire department, the fire department shows up to see if there is a real fire and there isn't, not only are you taking away manpower for a potential fire, the prankster wastes time, money, and resource.

    Protected Speech only protects the individual from legal repricussion, not social reprecussion which is why the internet provides a safe haven for those that have extreme racial, political, and religious views because these individuals understand that aside from their anonymity, they are legally protected from their views and do not fear social repricussion. But their speech is nonetheless limited. In my philosophical view when speech is only limited to a particular sphere (e.g. internet) then it is not necessarily free speech as any real freedom isn't restricted into one particular sphere.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,509
    Thanks Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,920
    We are the only Country I know of that allows the "level" of free speech we have. The only speech that is banned is that which can cause harm. Freedom does not mean acceptance. Socially there will always be dislikes and anger over certain things that are ostensibly free. That does not negate the fact they are free.

    I do not believe in fate. I believe we are free to make our own choices. But let me specify something, I also believe that powers beyond man's can and does place agents into the Human mix. These agents are for all intents and purposes human. But they are predisposed by these powers to act in a certain manner. BUT even these agents being exposed to free will will eventually start acting on that free will.

    As to free speech, every time we support a law that restricts rights we kill some speech. Every time we look the other way when the Government or society silences certain free speech, we kill some of our freedoms.

    And lets be clear, hateful, ignorant, social unacceptable, politically incorrect speech is the very speech that we should, while possibly disagreeing with, defend.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. The Infidel
    Offline

    The Infidel EVIL CONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    May 19, 2010
    Messages:
    17,252
    Thanks Received:
    3,170
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    AMERITOPIA
    Ratings:
    +3,173

    Free speech was designed for things most of us would disagree with.


    The left is going to do all they can to squelch it too
    .
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    People who are wrong should be entitled to more free speech if it will keep em from going all postal on us.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Aristotle
    Offline

    Aristotle Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Messages:
    1,599
    Thanks Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +125
    I see what you're saying but don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that we ought to not have free speech or speech which is considered venemous ought to not be legally protected, I'm merely saying that there is no such thing as absolute free speech.

    The key word here is "absolute."

    In America, we have decreed speech as "free" insofar as it does not violate societal standards of civility. Venemous speech may indeed fall under this umbrella but there is a fine line. I guess my point is, which should have been more clear is that we do not have absolute free speech.
     
  6. Mad Scientist
    Offline

    Mad Scientist Deplorable Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    23,936
    Thanks Received:
    5,211
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Ratings:
    +7,676
    Offensive Speech is the only type that needs protecting as no one is offended by Polite Speech are they?
     
  7. C_Clayton_Jones
    Offline

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    41,543
    Thanks Received:
    8,933
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +23,869
    Protected speech, then, rather than 'free,' speech that is protected form government restriction per settled case law.

    Pornography is protected speech, obscenity not.

    In general speech that does not manifest imminent lawlessness is protected, regardless how offensive or hateful.

    “I hate blacks and want to see them all dead” is protected speech.

    “Let’s meet at the coffee shop in half an hour and kill the black owner when he opens for business” is not protected speech.
     
  8. Aristotle
    Offline

    Aristotle Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Messages:
    1,599
    Thanks Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +125

    Then in your opinion why the common statement "it's free speech?"
    But I agree with your break down nonetheless.
     
  9. alan1
    Offline

    alan1 USMB Mod Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2008
    Messages:
    18,845
    Thanks Received:
    3,577
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Shoveling the ashes
    Ratings:
    +3,769
    I am free to swing my fist around also. My freedom to swing my fist ends right before my fist hits your nose.
    Likewise, my freedom of speech ends when it physically harms you. By the way, slander can physically harm a person in an indirect way if it impacts them earning a living to support them-self.
    Yelling "fire" in a crowded place could cause panic that results in harm to somebody as people try to escape the (false) danger.
     
  10. Mad Scientist
    Offline

    Mad Scientist Deplorable Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    23,936
    Thanks Received:
    5,211
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Ratings:
    +7,676
    EDIT: Quote WASN'T from Aristotle.
     
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2012

Share This Page