Free speech

Originally Posted by BLACKFIRE

That is what I was trying to convey!! People are fighting for their rights all over the world and I dont view it as a privalidge that has to be earned, it is a right of every human being to be able to express their point of view, rightly or wrongly, without persacution.

That's not what I was trying to say at all. In fact quite the oposite.

My point was that liberty is NOT something you get given. It DOES have to be earnt, we're just fortunate that in the UK it was earnt for us by generations before us - something we now take for granted.

Originally Posted by rubberduckofdeath

You make a good point and it's true, but that doesn't mean that everyone on this planet shouldn't in theory be entitled to speak freely, does it?

Nope, and I never said otherwise. Doesnt change the fact that for every person who wants their voice to be heard there's another trying to shut them up, though.

Originally Posted by Flamin_Squirrel

Nope, and I never said otherwise. Doesnt change the fact that for every person who wants their voice to be heard there's another trying to shut them up, though.

Sounds just like this forum

[northwind]

Originally Posted by gettin2dizzy

Free Speech is being able to air your views without fear of goverment censorship, not an route to commit crimes such as racial hatred and libel without fear of prosecution.

Exactly! But at which point does opinion become libel or preaching racial hatred? Nobody believes free speech should be an absolute, including yourself obviously, so where do you draw the line? I'm asking the quesiton because I haven't got the slightest idea what the answer is, but I wonder what's worse- suppressing free speech, or allowing the unchallenged propogation of a lie? We've seen often enough in this country that the facts aren't important, all you have to do is repeat the same lie over and over in a loud voice and eventually everyone believes it. For instance:

Originally Posted by gettin2dizzy

The Korans states there can only be one religion and that you should fight until the whole world follows Islam.

Not to sound like a broken record, but it doesn't. I did a big post on this a wee while back, can't be bothered to do it again. The Qu'ran specifically states acceptance of other religions. The Bible, on the other hand...

Originally Posted by northwind

Exactly! But at which point does opinion become libel or preaching racial hatred? Nobody believes free speech should be an absolute, including yourself obviously, so where do you draw the line? I'm asking the quesiton because I haven't got the slightest idea what the answer is, but I wonder what's worse- suppressing free speech, or allowing the unchallenged propogation of a lie? We've seen often enough in this country that the facts aren't important, all you have to do is repeat the same lie over and over in a loud voice and eventually everyone believes it.

Not just religion that applies to either. Democratic politics seems to revolve around twisting lies to fit carefully chosen facts in an attempt to appear legitimate.

Science, which in some regards has become its own religion. The global warming movement, for instance, which is arguably formed by a core of totally un-impartial scientists and their loyal band of hippy followers has actually got a large number of people if not the majority of people believing them without question.

Although I've heard the global warming movement described as the last bastion of left wing politics, so perhaps it shouldn't come under science...

[the_lone_wolf]

Originally Posted by Flamin_Squirrel

Science, which in some regards has become its own religion.

only if someone is bending the truth to suit themselves...

Originally Posted by the_lone_wolf

only if someone is bending the truth to suit themselves...

I was trying to point out how much blind faith (faith being the operative word) we put in scientists, rather than science its self.

A controversial debate at the Oxford Union was disrupted when protesters forced their way into a building. The BBC's Paul Moss, from The World Tonight, witnessed the angry scenes ahead of talks by BNP leader Nick Griffin and historian David Irving.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/o...re/7114343.stm

Originally Posted by northwind

Exactly! But at which point does opinion become libel or preaching racial hatred? Nobody believes free speech should be an absolute, including yourself obviously, so where do you draw the line? I'm asking the quesiton because I haven't got the slightest idea what the answer is, but I wonder what's worse- suppressing free speech, or allowing the unchallenged propogation of a lie? We've seen often enough in this country that the facts aren't important, all you have to do is repeat the same lie over and over in a loud voice and eventually everyone believes it. For instance:

Yeah it is a hard one. I'm on the free speech side of the argument...(surprise there ). One of life's beauties is the ability to have discussions, it's a shame that some people can't comprehend that arguing a point isn't like arguing with your missus

As for repeating lies; it amazes me how much government get away with nowadays. The anti corruption wing of the labour party is found to be corrupt....and that'll wash over in 2 days of headlines - terrible!

Unfortunately we have to assume that the vast majority of people are impressionable and easily led astray. I don't know why we have to, but it seems like we do. That's why we're only free to say things which will not be too fractious, and certainly can't say things which are intended to be. Free speech is a myth, if there are exceptions it doesn't exist.