Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I believe in free speech as long as it doesn't contain violent or sexual threats.
However, I disagree with Trump supporters' weird definition of free speech which means every website has to let you say whatever you want.
Just to make it clear: It's not just "Trump supporters" who are confused as to what exactly is meant by Constitutionally protected free speech. We've had posts in this thread that point out the difference between free speech and self-entitled demands for others to provide free soapboxes at their own expense. Much confusion still remains.
I will start by saying that I am a conservative (but not a Trump supporter) and I think that ALL opinions that do not advocate violence or breaking the law should be permitted, so long as those opinions are not presented as FACT. Period.
I couldn't agree more. I believe, to quote Justice Brandeis in his concurring opinion in Whitney v. California (link):
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCOTUS Justice Brandeis
If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence. Only an emergency can justify repression. Such must be the rule if authority is to be reconciled with freedom.5 Such, in my opinion, is the command of the Constitution. It is therefore always open to Americans to challenge a law abridging free speech and assembly by showing that there was no emergency justifying it.
For example, for the thugs that display the Confederate flag, let them be exposed for the hateful fools that they are. Don't suppress it. If we can see the haters we can address them directly. Ditto people who yell "blood and soil" or "no justice no peace."
If someone wants to stamp "stupid" on their foreheads let them. Those people won't convince anyone of anything.
This has been a fascinating read. I hesitate to even consider touching our freedom of speech rights unless it were to consider increasing them.
If neural link or some of the hi resolution brain scanning devices ever came out that could indicate if anyone was lying or not, I think I would demand all politicians to have to wear one on their head while talking to people outside of their home or private gatherings. Which...yeah massive invasion of privacy, but can you imagine the new joke? "How can you tell if a politician is lying? They're at home, alone, or with family and friends."
But seriously, touching these sort of well understood and current freedom of speech balances we have right now? Absolutely a insane risk. Even small changes could have large side effects. Take for example the supreme courts Citizen United decision. Thats turned out FAR worse then even I had expected when I first read it. We touch the underpinnings of our society and government at our peril I think.
Take for example the supreme courts Citizen United decision. Thats turned out FAR worse then even I had expected when I first read it. We touch the underpinnings of our society and government at our peril I think.
Disagree - Citizens United was an absolute correct decision as far as free speech is concerned. Business and others have as MUCH if not more right to free speech right than politicians, Unions, crazy enviro groups, BLM and other nazi type organizations.
I believe in free speech as long as it doesn't contain violent or sexual threats.
However, I disagree with Trump supporters' weird definition of free speech which means every website has to let you say whatever you want.
In the beginning, people were under the impression that sites like Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and others supported free speech and were politically neutral for the most part. That is one reason why these web sites gained so much popularity in the United States and globally.
However, as time went on, it became clear that these web sites promoted a liberal political agenda, even very radical views from the left, and they frequently censored conservative or right-wing views and opinions. The big tech companies engaged in a kind of slow poisoning where they ultimately showed their true colors.
But it's all good. Fortunately, other web platforms have sprung up that support actual free speech.
However, as time went on, it became clear that these web sites promoted a liberal political agenda, even very radical views from the left, and they frequently censored conservative or right-wing views and opinions.
Right wing views are not being censored. False statements and those who habitually make them are.
The fact that you conflate false statements with right-wing views is something you might want to reflect upon.
Should the right to free speech be modified?.....
So let's keep it simple....
Do you think that some opinions that do not advocate violence should be prohibited? And if you do, what kind of opinions, and why? And please indicate whether how you identify yourself, politically speaking.
I will start by saying that I am a conservative (but not a Trump supporter) and I think that ALL opinions that do not advocate violence or breaking the law should be permitted, so long as those opinions are not presented as FACT. Period.
I'm a conservative to, and now that I've said that, I'll say this:
Do you realize that the Supreme Court has ALREADY ruled on this, throughout the 20th century, multiple times for specific forms of speech in specific instances. There ALREADY are modifications in place that would apply IF WE WOULD JUST USE THEM AND QUIT IGNORING THE LAW WHENEVER WE FEEL LIKE IT. The exceptions to free speech are:
There are basically nine categories:
Obscenity
Fighting words
Defamation (including libel and slander)
Child pornography
Perjury
Blackmail
Incitement to imminent lawless action
True threats
Solicitations to commit crimes
The problem with this country is that we PAY NO ATTENTION to our own laws unless it's convenient for some political agenda... and so the consequence is we get laws that are ignored.... and non-laws that are imposed tactically in situations by officials who really don't have the authority to do that.
Our legal system is SO SCREWED UP that it ought to be completely reviewed and revised.
Don't listen to the agenda-driven demagogues who keep wanting to reinvent the wheel. We have the laws. Lets demand they be enforced EQUALLY, EVERYTIME.
That's bad news for Democrats AND Republican "law makers" Oops.... I mean "lawbreakers".
I believe in free speech as long as it doesn't contain violent or sexual threats.
However, I disagree with Trump supporters' weird definition of free speech which means every website has to let you say whatever you want.
To be fair to Trump supporters they are just parroting whatever talking head opined on the situation. And if its Republican members of congress, they know better than to confuse their minions with incorrect censorship complaints. It is effective. They get all these people upset who think rights are being taken away from them by Twitter, etc when in fact that is not how it works.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Pretty straight forward to me.
This has worked for over 200 years and will continue to work
The Founding Fathers placed it FIRST for a reason!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
