forums.rs

Forums

Is free speech important?

Quick find code: 23-24-301-66036000

of 19
Raleirosen

Raleirosen

Posts: 5,069 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Telcis said :
But surely, if freedom of speech is good regardless of the situation or what's being said. Then by extension propaganda is good. you don't understand free speech. it's the freedom to say things freely that is good, not the content of what's being said.
Pk3hitz said :
*theft, not taxation

edit: besides, if all you can do is taking what I say out of context, I won't waste my time on you. You are a hopeless case. hardline on taxation without seeing the value in free expression, to the point of confusing it with the first amendment... yeah, hopeless case is right. good thing you had the "out of context!" defense ready, otherwise it might have looked like you had no idea what you were talking about.

edit: LOL, just noticed the signature. pro-Western civilization but hostile towards free speech? what a colossal failing. no wonder the Swedish caliphate is so strong. Patrolling Lore FC almost makes you wish for a Great Revision.

19-Aug-2018 00:48:33 - Last edited on 19-Aug-2018 00:56:17 by Raleirosen

Telcis

Telcis

Posts: 19,270 Opal Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Its the insinuation that is offensive, not your opinion.

My logic about freedom of speech seems to have been oversimplified. Its not that Freedom of speech is bad, its simply recognizing that a blanket rule of freedom of speech can cause undue harm.
This doesn't mean I am against personal freedoms to have opinions, this means I support the following quote: "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others."

This suggests that freedom of speech should be interrupted if it causes harm to others.
But that opens up another can of worms as to what is harm.

19-Aug-2018 01:04:28

Pk3hitz

Pk3hitz

Posts: 91 Iron Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Raleirosen said :
edit: LOL, just noticed the signature. pro-Western civilization but hostile towards free speech? what a colossal failing. no wonder the Swedish caliphate is so strong.

I am not writing my posts for you. I am writing my posts for the independent thinking audience who can see the value in what I write. I'm not gonna play your ad-hominem games any longer. Your school indoctrinated you. Wake up.

19-Aug-2018 01:08:51

Raleirosen

Raleirosen

Posts: 5,069 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Pk3hitz said :
I am not writing my posts for you. I am writing my posts for the independent thinking audience who can see the value in what I write. I'm not gonna play your ad-hominem games any longer. your last two posts have been "out of context!" and "ad hominem!" which were preceded by, among other things, a laughable comparison between free speech and a system that's antithetical to free speech. such value! I'm sure that independent thinking audience is on the edge of their seats.
Telcis said :
This doesn't mean I am against personal freedoms to have opinions, this means I support the following quote: "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others."

This suggests that freedom of speech should be interrupted if it causes harm to others.
But that opens up another can of worms as to what is harm. exactly, in which case the only reasonable definition of harm is physical. read On Liberty if you haven't already because this really isn't a "can of worms" as you suggest. that's not to say it's completely settled, but there's no reason to approach free speech like it's a paradox of tolerance. Patrolling Lore FC almost makes you wish for a Great Revision.

19-Aug-2018 01:17:00 - Last edited on 19-Aug-2018 01:24:10 by Raleirosen

Telcis

Telcis

Posts: 19,270 Opal Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Exactly, there needs to be discussion on harm. As there is hardly an option that doesn't cause harm to someone in whatever way they want to construe it.
So would consideration to the community need to be considered?

A president that is unable to talk, would that harm the country? Arguably, in the case of USA some might consider that it would be good. Amusing, but not true.

Its a complex issue.

19-Aug-2018 01:20:14

Telcis

Telcis

Posts: 19,270 Opal Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Raleirosen said :
I'm sure that independent thinking audience is on the edge of their seats.

I certainly am! Absolutely riveting stuff! lol.

To clarify my use of can of worms, its not that its impossible to come to a reasonable conclusion. Its just that I recognize the depth of discussion that would be required to approach the topic and reach said conclusion.

19-Aug-2018 01:27:01

Pk3hitz

Pk3hitz

Posts: 91 Iron Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Raleirosen said :
your last two posts have been "out of context!" and "ad hominem!" which were preceded by, among other things, a laughable comparison between free speech and a system that's antithetical to free speech. such value! I'm sure that independent thinking audience is on the edge of their seats.
Your post proves that you feel you have to educate the "independent thinking audience" instead of just letting them read the posts for themselves. Your school indoctrinated you. Wake up.

19-Aug-2018 01:29:02

Quick find code: 23-24-301-66036000 Back to Top