When is freedom of speech/opinion over the top?

[Burnanation]

It looks like a lot of people that post on this site are from all over the place, with all kinds of different backgrounds and points of view. So I'll throw my perspective on the Freedom of Speech.

When I was in my 3rd year of high school I had 2 teachers that really helped me to understand the broad strokes of the US government. We spent a lot of time over the bill of rights. I remember we had lots of good talks about Freedom of Speech. We eventually were able to boil down the limitations of the freedom of speech to one sentence. "You can say anything you like, as long as it does not interfere with, limit, or deny the rights of others."

It's a pretty good catch all.

I'll provide an example and mind this is within the US and maybe entirely unrelated how your government would function. I walk into the middle of The Church of the Churchy People, I have a mega phone in hand and I announce that "I like big butts and I cannot lie!" While it is within my rights to make such a statement, doing so in this manner has interfered with the church go-er's Freedom of Assembly.

My wife and I are constantly trying to come to terms with differences between Brasil and US. Somethings that are "normal" here would get you a very puzzled look down there, and visa versa.

 

[Cryxx]

Free speech is great, I love it, but to me it means that I'm allowed to say what I want, when I want...not that I should all the time and often it seems that people got that part wrong.
To me it seems a bit that having a right to say or do something sometimes is used as an excuse to be, well a tosser and then say "I have the right, this is a free country!" and some how that makes it all okay.

And it's not always what you say but the way you say it that's the problem.

A simple example Person A "I like X band" Person B "man they suck, why don't you listen to some proper music!" is this really called for? wouldn't it have been better to just say "okay, not my type of music".

The whole free speech thing is something that's been talked alot about where I'm from (because of a few drawings...) and I've been thinking alot about it since then.
Guess what I'm trying to say is: Free speech is great, don't misuse it.

I hope this makes any kind of sense.

 

[Abbysal]

God I've got a headache!!

I think the main point of the starting topic is not about freedom of speech or arrogance, it is about having a friend who is confrontational when you yourself aren't. We all have 1, some have a couple more if they are unlucky, I have a great friend who is in my eyes extremely confrontational and never fails to embarrass me at least once when in the company of other friends. It's him, he is like that because he is. I'd like to put it down to him growing up with too many sisters which turned him into a bit of a bitch (something must have gone wrong) but I think it's just his nature. I actually fear responses from him , Especially while playing Hammer and find my self carefully articulating questions and answers in my head about 2 min's in advance (I'm a little slow) ha ha.

Colleagues are my downfall, I am of quite a sensitive nature and sometimes find it difficult to deal with teasing and tend to get very embarrassed very quickly.That is not good on a building site.
I know that jokes about Chinese womens fannies going horizontal instead of vertical is just that a joke but it does wear u down when u hear it almost every day and it becomes unbearable when twats you don't even know start in on it.
Luckily I am in China now teaching 3 year old Chinese children bad English, and they generally find it hard to wound me mentally (they are great at physical pain though especially with the old swift kick to the nuts!!).

One thing a I can't stand, really can't stand is sarcasm and hate being in a conversation where I have to think of a reply to the sarcastic remark that I will inevitably receive in response to my original comment or question before it has even left my lips!! The thing is though and forgive me if I am wrong is that sarcasm usually comes from an idiots mouth, someone that is at least a little confrontational or just a cockney wanker like myself.

I didn't read everything and I am falling asleep again (I think lack of nourishment or I'm dying) but I just want to reply as politely as I can to a few thing's.

Another good example: the miss was likened to a puppy dog. What my friend meant, is that she wanted to be with me everywhere I went. But to her, a dog is a grave insult. Whatever you say, be aware that the person on the other end may attach different meanings than you do. So what they say might be rude to you, but is not to them, or vice versa. Or could have a completely different meaning, or a small difference in meaning.

We aren't talking about the communication between different cultures or languages, everyone that is pissed off because of their friends, colleagues or fellow British/American/Chinese peoples speaks the same language, we are talking about views and how they should be expressed. Don't get me wrong I know where you are coming from, but saying to your wife or my wife "you are like a little puppy" is a lot different from saying that something someone does is the wrong thing to do in an aggressive way.


[/quote]I'm not saying that people don't try to swindle the system, and whilst the benefit system continues to make it more financially viable to stay on benefits than find work then this will never change but I think that there are far more nationals flogging the system for everything they can get than there are immigrants.[/quote]

I agree that too many nationals abuse the system, but I have to say that the system is there primarily for nationals. And the thing that really pisses me off as if my wife and I were to have a child we would not get any help as SHE is Chinese! If I wanted a free house I would have to pretend my father slung me out because I am gay and he disapproves (something I obviously can't do now I am 28 and married) or something.

I have worked with a lot of foreigners and know first hand from the people I have met and have really liked that they do abuse the system and such stories like an Eastern European couple, No children get given a 5 bedroom house which they then rent out or buy at a third of the price from the council after living there for a year and then sell for full price are quite often true.

But let's be honest if you could do it you probably would, and if we are going to rant it shouldn't be about the people abusing the system it should be about the dick heads that inadvertently encourage abusive negative and sometimes racist behavior by letting people get away with it!

I tried to buy a house once, I was earning between 35 and 45,000 GBP (sorry no pound sign on my computer) my new wife was earning the same and we couldn't get a joint mortgage on a 250,000 house because she didn't have a British passport yet!

Back on track though, I agree that people are entitled to their opinions and their free speech and lets face it you could never ban it even if you tried. Now about confrontational friends,family and colleagues. If they piss you off constantly you have a choice

1:Tell them how you feel or felt when no one else is around, which will more often than not get you an apology for offending or at least a gentler discussion about the disagreement than you would in a group.

2:Smack them in the face.

3:Quit your job like I did.

4:Better yourself and let it go in 1 ear and out the other!

Sorry if I offended anyone I don't want to come across like an American and sorry I ranted on about nothing mostly!!:zombie:

 

[Grish]

You missed my point Abbysal. This whole discussion is about where do you draw the line, if ever, with freedom of speech. At what points can you/should you not say something. My point is, is that "how you should express your views" depends entirely upon who you ask, and where you come from. There's no such thing.

Some things people can agree on. I think most would say if they invited someone over for a family dinner (thanksgiving or some such) you shouldn't say to their Mother, "Hey B**ch, pass the F***in' gravy."

Other things people can't agree on. My friends tell racist jokes, or handicapped jokes, or any other type of joke. I know to other groups they'd be offensive. But they are not offensive to us, and we are not bad people. I regularly donate charity money and sponsor a family in India. (Does this make me good? Who the heck knows). Should I curb my freedom of speech when it offends someone? I say absolutely not. Grow some tougher skin. It's a choice to be offended or hurt. You don't have to be. You can realize it's a joke and not an actual insult.

It's not about different cultures. Two people growing up on the same street will have different ideas about what is appropriate and what is not. I have a friend that thinks family just dropping in and expecting food would be rude. I don't think it is; family and friends shouldn't have to call up and make elaborate plans just to come over. My point is, there is no right way to do this. There is no correct way to act and speak. Just a general socially accepted way, that has no basis in actual fact. Different people have different views, as well as different cultures. No one is wrong. You should be able to say whatever you want to say. And other people can respond however they want to respond.

 

[Abbysal]

"Hey B**ch, pass the F***in' gravy."

:rofl2:

I totally agree with you. My point though about your comment about your wife is that it is nothing like a taboo or controversial subject and in no way conflicts with our wives beliefs/feelings/preferences or views.

It's difficult to explain what I mean but I'll try, "Freedom of speech" to me doesn't really mean shit, it's just a way for people to say "hey if you don't like it, lump it". Everyone knows they can say what they want, but if I went up to a Muslim and said "you're stupid for not eating Pork" I would not be exercising my right to express how I feel I'd just be being a cock! Expressing my views on a political/religious and a lot of other controversial subjects to somone I just met, I would be being stupid for not waiting to know them a bit better.
Insulting someone with a truly harmless comment that is only insulting to some, and not really considered to be a particular view or belief or preference I would explain the differences in interpretation and then I wouldn't worry to much.

It's fine to sit down with a friend/relative/colleague who thinks or acts different to you and discuss your beliefs and problems with theirs as long as it is not aggressive and if you are willing to accept their views back and I have done so in the past on quite a few occasions.

You said about jokes with your friends, can I ask if there is any point in which you as a group would draw the line? I don't think my friends and I have one but I find in different social situations even someone that can go too far in the company of friends but not have to worry about it would know when to stop. There are some though who evidently don't.

Example, My relative (who I love by the way) has a horrible habit of telling Pedophilia jokes in any social situation which I find disturbing, inappropriate and generally in bad taste. I would like nothing more to see all pedophiles hung by their bollox with free flowing hypodermic needles stuck in there jugular so that they slowly drip dry!
I don't like jokes about it at all,but I would not have a go about it or probably not even try to pull him up about it in any way while there were other people about. Is he going to far with his Freedom of speech, Is he just intentionally being controversial, Is he a Pedophile and trying to gauge other peoples reactions in case he's found out, or is he just a dickhead with little to no morals that doesn't understand that other people can and will get very offended by what he is saying?
I think he's doing it on purpose and trying to be controversial because he's a twat!
Whatever the reason though I would not say anything until we were alone, in case he didn't realize because his normal social circle are never offended by anything.

I don't know if I've got a point, can anyone see it? If you see my point can you let me know what it is please.:zombie:

 

[Swissdictator]

As far as I'm concerned, everything should be fine with only certain exceptions.

No general calls to violence. Nothing that could lead directly to harm (IE: Shoting fire in a crowded theatre).

Outside of that, I really don't care. I have an Irish and Catholic background and I do strongly identify with that, and if you want to say all Irish and Catholics are good for nothing fish eaters who are lazy bums that have too many children I'd say you're well within your rights... but I have the right to roll my eyes and think you're a little crazy.

I find the laws in various countries where people can go to jail for speaking against gay marriage as it is supposedly 'hate speech' (despite not being 100% het myself) disturbing at best. Just as I would find the opposite disturbing.

The only 'hate speech' that should be banned is when someone is calling for violence upon a group of people. That, and only that. I don't care if you think someone calling for a ban on gay marriage, or a ban on alcohol, or harsher penalties for criminals is somehow "speaking against people's rights"... in those cases they're calling for a political action (even if wretched to us), that would have to go through the political process. That should be protected. Would it be hate speech if they were saying "allow ONLY gay marriage"? I say no, and I'd defend their right to say that too.

In my own country we're getting to the point where you can shut down someone by simply calling them "Racist". This is no different than calling someone "Communist" in the 1950's, "Witch" in the 1600's, or "Heretic" in the middle ages. The accusation is enough, and there in no innocence. Either you confess, or you're guilty.

I don't give a damn if something is offensive. In general, that should be irrelevant. Especially on university grounds, or other publics settings. There should be no academic consequences to people speaking their mind and having unpopular beliefs, that should be encouraged to foster discussion! As even if you disagree, the conversation itself can be a powerful tool. Even if you don't change your mind, you might understand things better due the logical exercise of the discussion. Yet we had universities banning the American flag on 9/11.

I was ordered to take down a picture of the ruins of the WTC with the caption "It IS a war!" (it was on my door room door) as people were offended. However, when I was upset that people had stuff on their doors comparing Bush to Hitler... I was told that was different. Apparently university policy trumps our constitution. A school mate of mine had a similar experience when he had a sign calling Obama borderline totalitarian, as people found that offensive (and this is much more mild than what people said about Bush).

I'm somewhere to the right of Atilla the Hun on certain issues (defense being one of them). I am old fashioned, but I take the Bill of Rights and the fundamental principles of what it means to be a Republic to heart.

If you can't respect the right of people to say whatever they want, with the exception of those two extremes, you disgust me.

There is also a fine line between not promoting someone for being uncivil (IE: cursing all the time) and sending someone to sensitivity training because they had a poster similar to mine displayed. One is simply making them a less favorable candidate for promotion, the other is outright punishment and attempted re-education.

 

[Johnny B]

Should I curb my freedom of speech when it offends someone? I say absolutely not. Grow some tougher skin. It's a choice to be offended or hurt. You don't have to be.

So, you should just say whatever you want and its up to other people to deal with it? Is it that hard to afford a little consideration? Not everyone operates on the same principles as you, (and yes, I realise this is the point) and most people won't take the 'I can choose not to be offended' option, if indeed it is an option for everyone (I don't believe it is). It just doesn't strike me as a smart way of operating.

You can realize it's a joke and not an actual insult.

Its a joke to you. Often, that's why it offends.

 

[Sanai]

Freedom of speech is Nevar over the top. As long as I get the freedom to say "You are an idiot so please shut the fuck up".

What does annoy me however (particularly here in australia) is when the media gets involved.
Recently, Tony Abbot (Leader of the Liberal Party) said "No Means No" about the labour party changing their mind on wanting a debate. Next day, according to the media, its a rape joke. Yes, No means no was an anti-rape slogan. But anti-rape adverts don't own the phrase, it can just mean that no means no. But no, the media blew it all out of proportion, got all intrusive and preachy and forced the poor man to apologise. I hate the Australian Media. (Especially Channel 9.)

 

[Danceman]

I've used that phrase myself! Does this mean I am making fun of rape-victims?!

Sounds like those journalist needs to learn to apply proper context to the word/phrase before going mental. Then again we seem to live in a world of fake news with so-called moral outrages over every tiny little stupid detail. Amazing really...

 

[bahamutzer0]

Other than yelling fire in a movie theater or something like that which is illegal for a good reason, anything goes with me and my friends. We've cleared entire sections of restaurants because of our foul mouths, cursing, racism, rape jokes, death threats, you name it and one of us has probably said it. I guess in my friends and my case, what we say is usually over the top, but thats the 1st amendment for ya, freedom of speech and we abuse the hell out of it. The only times we aren't talking like that is when its really really inappropriate like at weddings, when kids are around and in court. Other than that, its all good, I want to make a racist remark to someone then I better be ready for a fight, I want to curse my head off in McDonalds then I better be ready to get thrown out, that simple. There is a Jewish guy that lived down the block from where my friend lived that drove a Mercedes, when ever we saw him we told him he was a traitor to his race, Mercedes made ovens for the Nazis. To this day if we see him we start getting on him. To us, there is just about no line, everyone is fair game to say anything to anyone, you want to call me a Nazi cuz I'm German, sure, go right ahead, doesn't faze me in the slightest. In my group of friends, you know we like you if we say racist/sexist remarks to you and laugh, when we say that stuff and don't laugh then its usually a good sign to get out of dodge.

On the other though, we have a lot of fun being super PC so we can make people feel guilty and weird, "I'm not short, I'm vertically challenged you insensitive bastard!" and telling African Americans that they are racist and act offended when they refer to themselves as black. I love using the vertically challenged one at work when a customer calls me short, I just start acting all annoyed or pissed until they finally ask me what my problem is. Or I just tell them right there that I am vertically challenged, one woman laughed when I said that, I just looked at her with a super pissed expression on my face and she was apologizing to me a second later. Using words for their exact meaning is something we do too, g**k, racist word ain't it, nope, means peasant. The N word, means ignorant negro. Negroid, medical term for the facial structure of "blacks".

I actually believe the 1st amendment doesn't protect us enough. Case in point, a few years ago I was watching the news when they had a report of a Caucasian teacher being fired for saying nigga to an African American student. The teacher asked the student to sit down and the student said something like "alright, alright, I'm sitting down, calm down nigga". Which then the teacher replied, "well I shouldn't have to ask you nigga". Nigga isn't even classified as a racist remark, all the guy did was use the same exact word as the student and he got fired over it. I hear that word used like a hundred times a day at work between the African American workers, the other employees don't say anything and neither do the customers, but if I were to talk to my "black" friends at work like that I'd be fired no question, why, because I'm white, double standards, gotta love'em. My friends and I were calling each other nigga for weeks after I told them about what happened to that teacher. Writing that made me remember this kid in high school that would always say nigga to everyone whether they were black, white, whatever, which was cool. Boy did I sure piss that kid off when I started calling him a cracka, I got pulled into the principal's office over it. Went to the bathroom before I went in to see her, made a call, sat on the toilet to buy some time and by the time I exited it, bang, there was my lawyer. Walk into a principal's office with a lawyer and they'll do anything not to get sued, so she sent me back to class a few minutes later and for the rest of school year I called that kid a cracka whether or not he called me nigga. Actually, I got suspended in 8th grade (i think) for telling a teacher he was a bigot for using the word Nazi. The third reich were the National Socialists, Nazi is a derogatory term for them, didn't have my lawyer then so suspended I was.


Now here is a real good question for you all, there is a religion called Jashinism (subsect of Taoism, Kishimoto didn't make it up) which the key figure is Lord Jashin, God of death, evil and destruction. If a priest of jashinism stands on a corner like any other religious freak preaching on how to save your soul and all that, but since murdering heathens is at the very core of the religion, said religious freak would be publicly advocating murder of just about everyone who isn't Jashinist. So is he covered by the 1st amendment? does it being concerned with a religion make a difference?

 

[Danceman]

Now here is a real good question for you all, there is a religion called Jashinism (subsect of Taoism, Kishimoto didn't make it up) which the key figure is Lord Jashin, God of death, evil and destruction. If a priest of jashinism stands on a corner like any other religious freak preaching on how to save your soul and all that, but since murdering heathens is at the very core of the religion, said religious freak would be publicly advocating murder of just about everyone who isn't Jashinist. So is he covered by the 1st amendment?

This would be hate-speech, and most certainly isn't legal here and I doubt it is over there in the states either. It would depend on how he was preaching it.
If he goes on "the heaten deserve to die", "will suffer" if they do not adhere to the true religion(which of course is his own religion) then it isn't breaking any laws. He, like some mainstream religions, are actively preaching the lesser worth certain individuals(take the rather disgusting treatment of gays in recent years for example). However, lets be glad that common sense and humanism seem to winning over zealous bigotry.
For now!

The point I am making is that for it to be hate-speech it must directly move onto inflicting harm. "Suggestion" or whatever we might call it is not illegal.

does it being concerned with a religion make a difference?

Not at all. It shouldn't at any rate. Let's all be thankful that we do not live in a theocracy(like Saudi-Arabia, North Korea for example).

 

[C'Thulhu]

I listen to the news on my way to college and I heard a story that relates to this perfectly.

In America there's a church, Westboro Baptist, that has been protesting at the funerals of soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. They've done things such as throw paint on the caskets and claim that 9/11 and the soldiers who have died in combat are God's way of punishing America for accepting gays as equals. A man sued them after they protested at his son's funeral. They claim the first amendment protects them, but to me they are violating a core American value: You are free to do what you want until you infringe on the freedoms of others.

I can only imagine that man's hatred for the Westboro Baptists for tarnishing the last moments he spent with his son on earth.

 

[Johnny B]

Now here is a real good question for you all, there is a religion called Jashinism (subsect of Taoism, Kishimoto didn't make it up) which the key figure is Lord Jashin, God of death, evil and destruction. If a priest of jashinism stands on a corner like any other religious freak preaching on how to save your soul and all that, but since murdering heathens is at the very core of the religion, said religious freak would be publicly advocating murder of just about everyone who isn't Jashinist.

Lol what. It might be a religion but only when enough manga fans band together to make it so.

 

[Danceman]

I listen to the news on my way to college and I heard a story that relates to this perfectly.

In America there's a church, Westboro Baptist, that has been protesting at the funerals of soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. They've done things such as throw paint on the caskets and claim that 9/11 and the soldiers who have died in combat are God's way of punishing America for accepting gays as equals. A man sued them after they protested at his son's funeral. They claim the first amendment protects them, but to me they are violating a core American value: You are free to do what you want until you infringe on the freedoms of others.

I can only imagine that man's hatred for the Westboro Baptists for tarnishing the last moments he spent with his son on earth.

This would be the core of my problem with his religious discuourse these days are handled. Handled with way too much respect and someone saying "this is just my faith" seem to work like some "get out of jail free"-card.

--

Rant mode; on.

Basically using religion as the cornerstone for hating gays. Chanting "god hates fags" and it that isn't natural. Have these people even bothered to take a good look at nature? Homosexuality is very natural. I have little doubt that most of humanity would be bi-sexual if we weren't brainwashed into think homosexuals are dirty beasts. Something I cannot possibly come to terms with as I have frequented plenty of gaybars in my time(yes, that's right I've ventured into the belly of the beast and survived... Guess I'm not just as sexually insecure as certain people). Guess what? They're just like everyone else. The reason for being there? Well, I have homosexual and bisexual friends.

They just don't have the same taste as you. Some men like a hot dog over a taco. So what?

Same goes for the pro-lifers. Don't even get me started on those...

Basically, people need to get with the programme and realise that when making an argument you need to form as such if the argument were stated by someone else and you would not be convinced it is weak argument by default.
"I believe this because X god has Y message in my holy book". This is an argument only worth something if the person next to you holds the same beliefs as otherwise the case have no hold. To adult of a different philosophical viewpoint it is the same as saying "Because I say so". It has exactly the same meaning, or rather lack thereof.

On the other hand I don't particularly care what you believe but when it becomes a problem is when someone think he or she has the right to call me a sinful immoral wretchful being. Then you've stepped out of the faith zone and are starting to institutionalize a belief in a way of life I find no more compelling than what is written in the Lord of the Rings. As you would expect I am going to have a serious problem with this.

Freedom of speech is a privilige, a right in so far we've fought long and hard to gain it. It is easily lost and is being lost to fear and terror world-wide with more police state-like surveillence laws, security laws and so on. Censorship seems to be all the rage as certain words are even being outlawed.

What is my point? Let us sit down like equals, reason and discuss. Form our argument on equal terms. No one is greater than the next regardless of faith or background. Let us offend and explain why, let us talk us in civil tone.

Freedom of speech and compassion, perspectives worth fighting for.

* PS; I aim not to offend any believers, nor do I think I have(if I have, grow a pair). I am speaking out against prejudice and hatred on the basis of unreasonable standards, or the institutionalision(sp?) of these ideas.