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

Forums - Politics Discussion - Freedom of speech is under attack and it could get worse

badgenome on 24 January 2015
IFireflyl said:

No. This kind of resentment was built because he didn't properly read what I said, and then he implied that I'm pro-slavery. So I'm done with him.

I can read just fine.

"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."

That's pretty unambiguous. You were arguing that laws dictate what happens in a society, which is ass backwards. A society determines its laws based on its values and interests. If a society where slavery is illegal decides that slavery suits them just fine, then they will have slavery anyway, just like a society in which it was illegal to disparage religious communities ended up murdering Jews on an industrial scale.



Around the Network
IFireflyl on 26 January 2015
badgenome said:
IFireflyl said:

No. This kind of resentment was built because he didn't properly read what I said, and then he implied that I'm pro-slavery. So I'm done with him.

I can read just fine.

"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."

That's pretty unambiguous. You were arguing that laws dictate what happens in a society, which is ass backwards. A society determines its laws based on its values and interests. If a society where slavery is illegal decides that slavery suits them just fine, then they will have slavery anyway, just like a society in which it was illegal to disparage religious communities ended up murdering Jews on an industrial scale.


Okay. Have a nice day.



 

Panther111 on 26 January 2015
JoeAncelotti said:
binary solo said:
There is no country where speech is absolutely free from constraints. It's just a matter of where you draw the line. In parts of Europe it's illegal to deny the holocaust, and some countries will not allow foreign holocaust deniers to enter the country.

It's the laughable thing about so many people who yell and scream about freedom. They fail to understand that freedom is legitimately constrained in all sorts of ways, and indeed they normally agree with at least some of these constraints, though perhaps don't actually realise they are constraints on freedom.


This is absolutely true. We have a man called Geert Wilders over here in the politics that blames a lot of Islamic people for the terrorist attacks and maroccan people for making the cities unsafe and sometimes he crosses that famous super thin line between freedom of speech and discrimination which often gets him sued but eventually not prosecuted. And I think that's a big topic these days. Where do you put that line? 


The doctrine contained within certain religious manifestos, is ripe with discrimination, call for segregation and champions inequality and shuns freedom. 

If certain forms of discrimination is protected under the guise of religion, why should the religious be allowed to discriminate, but be free from being called into question about the manifesto within the book they follow that actively discriminates?