By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
IFireflyl on 24 January 2015
Edit Thread
padib said:
IFireflyl said:

To answer this question, yes. Yes I do. Do I think we should be able to do that? Yes. I just don't think that we can. My reasoning is that history shows that bad people do bad things. Words and actions can be harmful. To a (I might even say 'very') small extent I think what is said needs to be regulated. The people that would abuse what you're saying may be in the minority, but it is easier to prevent/deter something bad from happening (in the context of rules/regulations/etc) than it is to clean up the mess afterwards. Take slavery for example. If there had been laws in place that said slavery is illegal in the first place then the U.S. wouldn't have had slavery. They had slavery though. Guess what? The black community still remembers that. Have you heard about the Ferguson, MO riots that recently happened? Granted, freedom and freedom of speech are two different things, but it is the same principle. There were no laws against slavery. When someone said publicly, "Let's have slaves," did people band together and throw that idea out the window? No. People got on board with it. The rest is history, but I think I've made my point. I like your ideals. I just don't think humanity is grown up enough to handle that.

I see where you're coming from. Part of me agrees with you, but part of me wants to hope in the better side of us. My thinking is that, if I treat my fellow as a rational being, then odds are he will behave as I treat him. If I treat him like a sheep, he may very well end up acting as a sheep.

Does that make sense?

I heard of the Ferguson MO riots, people do remember repression. That's why I think that repressing ideas is harmful on the long term. The solution that repression attempts to bring is the same as the one I would like to see (e.g. harmony), I just believe that the approach leads to unhealthy outcomes.

If someone has a bad idea, if they are repressed it could backfire over the long term. If they are given the right to speak and be heard, they may be convinced to change their minds.


I get what you're saying, I do... but this just goes back to the slavery issue. There are other examples, I'm sure. Slavery is a big one, and it is one that can't be argued. Everyone knows it happened. People didn't get together and say, "You know what... it's probably not a good idea that we own another human being." They got together and said, "Make someone else work for me?? How much?!!?!?!!" It was a disgusting thing to do, and because their weren't laws against it people got on board. Because people weren't restricted they said, and did, what they wanted to do. A lot of people. A lot. So what happens if we let people freely speak out (publically) against the government/races/religions, and enough people agree? That kind of hate speech is what causes war and pandamonium. It causes people to turn on each other. It causes a rift between two or more entities. Your idea is great, but only if it works 100% of the time. We know that people are stubborn, so when stubborn people have opposite views, and they can publicly vent whatever they want it just causes problems. When it doesn't work, when people make the wrong choice, there is pain and suffering for generations. That kind of bad far outweighs any good.