| padib said: The whole idea of freedom of speech is based on the trust that people will not simply speak out of emotion. I can't censor you and I have no desire to, but I reserve the right to tell you when I think you're just responding out of emotion and not actually reading what I write, especially when you parrot the same ideas despite my dealing with new aspects and replying to the concerns of other users. Therefore what you are doing is what I consider harmful. You are not putting thought into our debate, rather just speaking to antagonize or bully a different idea out of debate. I hope you understand what I mean. If a demagogue exists, no law can change that because people can say what they want behind closed doors. I'm advocating for opening the doors so that ideas can naturally be under the filter of reason and logic, being challenged by opposing ideas. Light begets light, not confusion. |
| IFireflyl said: You started this thread, but this is the internet, and this thread doesn't belong to you. You can't dictate how I respond to you. I will respond how I like. There has to be restriction on what can be said/done otherwise. There's always going to be someone touting the "Freedom of Speech" line. I hear what you're saying. You're not saying anything different. I'm just saying that there are going to be restrictions, and it is difficult to tell where the line is in a lot of cases. Everything can't be aired out in public. That causes chaos, confusion, panic, etc. |
| padib said: You are not putting thought into our debate, rather just speaking to antagonize or bully a different idea out of debate. |
As you can see, you are wrong. I specifically addressed what you said. I can't help it if you won't read what I said. There is a lot that should not be aired out in public. There isn't absolute freedom anywhere, and it's because the people that would do bad with it, while possibly in the minority, would wreak havoc. People are not inately good. We're selfish, judgmental, prideful, etc. Look at any child. Children don't grow up to be polite on their own. Children are disciplined. I don't say that in a negative way. There is a right way, and a wrong way, to discipline. Children grow up taking other people's toys, not wanting to share, wanting all of the attention, getting jealous, and so much more. We have to teach them the right way to behave. Left to their own vices children would be tyrants. What you're saying is that everyone should be able to talk about anything they want, and as long as it isn't behind closed doors it's okay. I say that is wishful thinking. If we lived in a perfect world, we could do that. We live in an imperfect world.
| padib said: You are not putting thought into our debate, rather just speaking to antagonize or bully a different idea out of debate. |
I fail to see where a disagreement is bullying or antagonizing. I said nothing mean, or hurtful. I just didn't agree with you.
