Free speach

Hah, nice.

 

im confused... i think that the klan or nazis are bad... but thats my view. we worked hard to stop descrimination of colored people because black is beautiful, but people should have free speech... ?? i dont know. maybe its the actual act against the blacks that was horrible.. and not just the marches, ect. anyone have any input?

 

I believe that you can oppress a group with words and ideas just as easily as you can with physical action.

Here is another example of how unlimited free speech can be harmful. Sexual harassment:

A young, attractive, smart, hard working, woman is working as a marketer in the high tech industry. She has to meet with the sales force all over the USA to discuss strategies and help define new products. She has a meeting in one area with the regional sales manager and several sales associates. She suggests a novel new idea. The sales manager immediately belittles the idea, and suggests that a better idea would be for her put on a leather mini-skirt and use her sex appeal to sell product. Of course all the other sales guys join in because they can’t go against their boss. This goes on for hours. So now she cannot work with this group effectively. It doesn’t matter that she is hard working, or smart. It doesn’t matter that she has worked years to get where she is. Of course, she still has to visit this group, and it makes her physically sick every time she thinks about it. If she would report this guy everyone would deny what happened. She wonders why the manager would do this.

This is a true story. The point is that you don’t have to touch a person to cause damage. This is why there are laws against sexual harassment. The other point is that there ARE limits to the freedom of speech. Even the strongest advocates of the freedom of speech have admitted that it didn’t cover slander. Slander is not mentioned in the first amendment, and so, the implication is that the law makers have to interpret the first amendment when making laws.

 

Abnormal, that's a kind of speech that actually harms someone. If, however, people (like nazis or the klan) say things that the majority just doesn't agree with, that should be protected. It's when they cross the line from their propaganda to threats or personal slander or harrasment like you said that action should be taken.

 

I suppose freedom of speech is fine. As far as the KKK and Nazis are concerned lets hope intelligence and common sense is the winner.

 

FreakerSoup,

I agree. The point is that there are some limits to free speach.

 

Some people on This thread are like "free speech as long as everybody agrees with me." If you truely beleived in total free speech, than Nazis, as well as those who say thing that you think are "factually incorrect" have just as much of a right to say what they want as you do.

Why stop at Nazis and the Klan? How about Misogynists (who oppress a LOT more people and have killed more people than Nazis have) Racists (same) people who don't like Italians, people who don't like the Irish, those who have a problem with, well, anybody I like.........

abnormal cat makes a GOOD point.......

 

One person's "disinformation" is an other person's platform.

ANYTHING could be considered "disinformation" if someone wanted to look closely enough.

 

yea i guess i'd say freedom of speech is good when you dont force your opinion on others. the whole point is to be able to make your opinion heard. but of course people will take advantage of the situation and twist it to give them some power and press it on other people. so thats not good obviously..

 

But it's unavoidable, so it's better to take the chances then to give up free speech.

 

Free speach is great, everyone is entitled to there opinion even if it is to invade another country, or kill someone. But people should be able to express there opinion against someone elses opinion