SamuelRSmith said:
Actually, I do have the right to say all those things about your mother and father... so long as I'm not in your property (and you've told me not to), or I'm in somebody else's property who has also told me not to. What you're essentially referring to are the defamation laws that babuks argued earlier. These are an infringement on rights. Here's why: Your basis for these laws is that you don't want to harm your reputation, or the reputation of your mother, or whoever. What is a reputation? Do you own your reputation? No. A reputation is held in the thoughts of the community, they are about you, but they are not yours. Ergo, you have no right to control them. In a world without defamation laws, people's reputations will be even more secure, why? Because anybody could say any old shit. I could call your father a rapist until the cows came home... nobody's going to believe me unless I have substantial proof; because they would hear shit like this all the time. |
I wasn't talking about having a right in doing so or not. What I'm trying to say is that one could rightly defame others, but if he abuses "Freedom of Speech" and is wrong or baseless, then he should be punished similar to how abusing traffic rules will get you fined, or how having your dog bark all night and annoy your neighbors will get you a law suit.
It is a harmful act. It doesn't just harm feelings, but also could provoke hate which leads to violence or cause financial damage as someone may lose a job, for instance, even due to baseless defaming. Their should be rules or borderlines that aren't too loose or too restrictive to "freedom of speech", but freedom should NEVER be absolute or without laws that ensure others aren't harmed.







