By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - What do you think? Should speech be limited or should it be unlimited?

Tagged games:

 

Restricted or unrestricted?

Restricted 1 4.17%
 
Unrestricted 17 70.83%
 
Results 6 25.00%
 
Total:24

By unlimited I mean without limit. Let people talk, sing whatever they want. No restrictions.

Or should it be limited? You know, no hating, no offensive stuff.

If you think freedom of speech should be restricted, would you want lying restricted too? Would you consider it as illegal as well?

Post your thoughts.



Around the Network

unlimited because then you will know FOR SURE how a person really thinks

like i would like to know if someone is racist off-rip rather than find out later on

and what about the people who like under aged girls/boys? or people who want to rape other people?

would you want them to hide or let it all out so everybody can see?

i personally would want everybody to show how they think about things so people could know how they are and what to expect from these types of people

so i say unlimited :)



Unlimited - If you start arresting people for saying offensive things then everyone in the entire country would be in jail because almost anything you say can be deemed offensive by someone.



Unlimited



ǝןdɯıs ʇı dǝǝʞ oʇ ǝʞıן ı ʍouʞ noʎ 

Ask me about being an elitist jerk

Time for hype

I kind of like what we have, which is both. Anything else seems impractical,



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Around the Network

Every freedom requires limitations and restrictions, otherwise it could and would inevitably be used to violate the individual rights of another. Limitations on speech as they are works quite fine.



DeadNotSleeping said:
Every freedom requires limitations and restrictions, otherwise it could and would inevitably be used to violate the individual rights of another. Limitations on speech as they are works quite fine.

How can freedom of speech "violate" another person's rights? There is no way for that to happen. Unless you think someone has a right to hearing selective speech, which they don't.



Unlimited. People should be able to say what they want, but others should be able to challenge what you say, or call you an idiot if you say something stupid.



 

 

 

mantlepiecek said:
DeadNotSleeping said:
Every freedom requires limitations and restrictions, otherwise it could and would inevitably be used to violate the individual rights of another. Limitations on speech as they are works quite fine.

How can freedom of speech "violate" another person's rights? There is no way for that to happen. Unless you think someone has a right to hearing selective speech, which they don't.


Harassment, threats, violation of doctor-patient confidentiality, breach of contract, slander, in some cases perjury, abetting, the list goes on.  With unrestricted free speech it would be very difficult to enforce academic fraud policies, protect the public from blatantly false advertising, that sort of thing.  Being able to say whatever the Hell you want whenever you want has serious legal ramifications that play heavily against your favor and invariably violate your rights.  Rather than leave the entire populace open to such abuses, restrictions on speech actually protect our rights.  Every freedom and right has limitations and restrictions for this very reason.

Too much sense?



BARE minimum limited. The line where public safety is protected.