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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Yooka Laylee remove 'controversial' Youtuber JonTron from game

Lawlight on 23 March 2017
Soundwave said:
Lawlight said:
For people who don't know what freedom of speech is:

Freedom of speech is the right to articulate one's opinions and ideas without fear of government retaliation or censorship, or societal sanction.

Notice the last 2 words.

There is no single definition of freedom of speech, various different countries have varying definitions of it. This is the US First Ammendment:

Freedom of religion: The First Amendment of the United States Constitution prevents the government from setting up or establishing an official religion of the country. American Citizens have the freedom to attend a church, mosque, synagogue, temple, or other house of worship of their choice. They can also choose to not be involved in any religion as well. Because of the First Amendment, we can practice our religion however we want to. 
Freedom of speech: The First Amendment of the United States Constitution stops the government from making any laws that may stop us from saying what we feel or think. The American people have the right to share their opinions with other people or criticize the government.
Freedom of the press: Freedom of the press means we have the right to get information from many different sources of information. The government does not have the power to control what is broadcasted on radio or TV, what is printed in books or newspapers, or what is offered online. American citizens can request time on TV to respond to any views that they disagree with. They can also write letters to newspapers, which might be printed for others readers to see. Americans can also pass out leaflets that state their opinions. They may also their own online web pages that have their opinions.
Freedom of assembly: American citizens have the right to come together in private and public gatherings. Citizens can join groups for religious, social, recreational, or political reasons. By organizing in order to act on a common idea and accomplish a common goal, American citizens can more easily spread their ideas to others.
Right to petition:  The right to petition the government means that American citizens can ask for adjustments or changes in the government. Citizens can do this by collecting signatures for petitions and sending them to elected representatives. They can also call, e-mail, or write to their elected representatives as well. Another way they can petition the government is by creating support groups that try to cause change by lobbying the government.

So, we're going by the US constitution? Also, don't the right to bear arms.



Around the Network
Soundwave on 23 March 2017
Lawlight said:
Soundwave said:

There is no single definition of freedom of speech, various different countries have varying definitions of it. This is the US First Ammendment:

Freedom of religion: The First Amendment of the United States Constitution prevents the government from setting up or establishing an official religion of the country. American Citizens have the freedom to attend a church, mosque, synagogue, temple, or other house of worship of their choice. They can also choose to not be involved in any religion as well. Because of the First Amendment, we can practice our religion however we want to. 
Freedom of speech: The First Amendment of the United States Constitution stops the government from making any laws that may stop us from saying what we feel or think. The American people have the right to share their opinions with other people or criticize the government.
Freedom of the press: Freedom of the press means we have the right to get information from many different sources of information. The government does not have the power to control what is broadcasted on radio or TV, what is printed in books or newspapers, or what is offered online. American citizens can request time on TV to respond to any views that they disagree with. They can also write letters to newspapers, which might be printed for others readers to see. Americans can also pass out leaflets that state their opinions. They may also their own online web pages that have their opinions.
Freedom of assembly: American citizens have the right to come together in private and public gatherings. Citizens can join groups for religious, social, recreational, or political reasons. By organizing in order to act on a common idea and accomplish a common goal, American citizens can more easily spread their ideas to others.
Right to petition:  The right to petition the government means that American citizens can ask for adjustments or changes in the government. Citizens can do this by collecting signatures for petitions and sending them to elected representatives. They can also call, e-mail, or write to their elected representatives as well. Another way they can petition the government is by creating support groups that try to cause change by lobbying the government.

So, we're going by the US constitution? Also, don't the right to bear arms.

Seeing as how I believe JonTron is an American citizen (immigrant?), sure why not. 

Freedom of speech is not aboslute in the US, not even in a legal sense, for example you can be sued and jailed for the crime of slander, so yes, there are consequences for what you say. "Free speech" is not a blank slate to say whatever you want and expect zero blow back. 



Lawlight on 23 March 2017
SamLeheny said:
Queue accusations of censorship and stifling of free speech by people who don't understand either of those concepts.
Aaaaaaaand Go!

Queue accusations of misunderstanding of freedom of speech by people who don't understand the concept.

Aaaaannd Go!

 

That was an easy argument to counter.



Lawlight on 23 March 2017
Soundwave said:
Lawlight said:

So, we're going by the US constitution? Also, don't the right to bear arms.

Seeing as how I believe JonTron is an American citizen (immigrant?), sure why not. 

Freedom of speech is not aboslute in the US, not even in a legal sense, for example you can be sued and jailed for the crime of slander, so yes, there are consequences for what you say. 

Slander is different as you're attacking a particular person. Not very comparable.



monocle_layton on 23 March 2017
Lawlight said:
monocle_layton said:

So...we can say anything we want and not be criticized for it?

 

That's the dumbest thing i ever heard...With your logic, i can go around shouting "atheists are all evil" or "gays are disgusting" and deflect any sort of response against me?

 

This sounds like the anti PC way of pulling out the victim card

Yes, you should be able to say those. Those sentences are dumb but you should be able to say it.

I wonder what your thoughts on blasphemy laws are.

If it promotes violence against people or is turned into a threat, the person should be given a penalty. If it is severe (i.e a threat), they deserve to get arrested.

Remember Madonna saying she wants to bomb the White House? That deserves an arrest, ESPECIALLY concerning the situation. She was in front of 500,000 people and was a celebrity. She could easily inspire a lunatic.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4142950/amp/Thousands-women-head-Washington-protest-Trump.html

 

While Jontron wasn't as bad, we have to realize that a company is a company. They do what they want, and that is how things go.

It isn't just what he said which bothers me; it is the poor execution. I wish he at least presented his facts in a different way. 

 

Regardless of what you say though, freedom of speech allows people to respond back, even if it is an overreaction.



Around the Network
Soundwave on 23 March 2017
Lawlight said:
Soundwave said:

Seeing as how I believe JonTron is an American citizen (immigrant?), sure why not. 

Freedom of speech is not aboslute in the US, not even in a legal sense, for example you can be sued and jailed for the crime of slander, so yes, there are consequences for what you say. 

Slander is different as you're attacking a particular person. Not very comparable.

OK, Lawlight so if you owned a restaurant and someone at your work came out and said "Death to infidels, death to Westerners, submit to Islam or die ... hey it's just my opinion that I want to share every five minutes even as I'm serving your hamburger" you'd stand up for them? 

And yes you agree on slander, that is speech, so not all speech is covered then. 



Lawlight on 23 March 2017
monocle_layton said:
Lawlight said:

Yes, you should be able to say those. Those sentences are dumb but you should be able to say it.

I wonder what your thoughts on blasphemy laws are.

If it promotes violence against people or is turned into a threat, the person should be given a penalty. If it is severe (i.e a threat), they deserve to get arrested.

Remember Madonna saying she wants to bomb the White House? That deserves an arrest, ESPECIALLY concerning the situation. She was in front of 500,000 people and was a celebrity. She could easily inspire a lunatic.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4142950/amp/Thousands-women-head-Washington-protest-Trump.html

 

While Jontron wasn't as bad, we have to realize that a company is a company. They do what they want, and that is how things go.

It isn't just what he said which bothers me; it is the poor execution. I wish he at least presented his facts in a different way. 

 

Regardless of what you say though, freedom of speech allows people to respond back, even if it is an overreaction.

So did JonTron mobilised people to go around and harm people? Unlike Madonna I don't think he did that. And notice how Madonna was not arrested. If JonTron was creating rallies asking people to go around and harm people then it would be different.

Imagine if a company decides to fire someone if he says that he doesn't believe in god. Well within their right but it is actually right?



Lawlight on 23 March 2017
Bandorr said:
Go to a job interview. Insult everyone. Insult the business, the owner, the secretary, the person interviewing you etc.
Then when you don't get the job - sue them. See how well that works.

Would you be friends with someone that says the nastiest disgusting insults to you, your family, and your friends?
Then why the hell would a business want to pay, and be represented by the same person?

People are just wanting to use free speech as hate speech.

Sorry your post makes no sense. You're comparing apples and oranges.



Soundwave on 23 March 2017
Lawlight said:
monocle_layton said:

If it promotes violence against people or is turned into a threat, the person should be given a penalty. If it is severe (i.e a threat), they deserve to get arrested.

Remember Madonna saying she wants to bomb the White House? That deserves an arrest, ESPECIALLY concerning the situation. She was in front of 500,000 people and was a celebrity. She could easily inspire a lunatic.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4142950/amp/Thousands-women-head-Washington-protest-Trump.html

 

While Jontron wasn't as bad, we have to realize that a company is a company. They do what they want, and that is how things go.

It isn't just what he said which bothers me; it is the poor execution. I wish he at least presented his facts in a different way. 

 

Regardless of what you say though, freedom of speech allows people to respond back, even if it is an overreaction.

So did JonTron mobilised people to go around and harm people? Unlike Madonna I don't think he did that. And notice how Madonna was not arrested. If JonTron was creating rallies asking people to go around and harm people then it would be different.

Imagine if a company decides to fire someone if he says that he doesn't believe in god. Well within their right but it is actually right?

How is that "well within their right" ... lol? That would be applicable in situations where religion is part of the business, maybe, but that's an odd analogy. 

And JonTron is not going to jail. He's losing some silly Youtube endorsement or whatever the fuck is so life altering. 

Madonna's music label is welcome to drop her if they want on the basis of her comments, that's their choice. 



Lawlight on 23 March 2017
Soundwave said:
Lawlight said:

Slander is different as you're attacking a particular person. Not very comparable.

OK, Lawlight so if you owned a restaurant and someone at your work came out and said "Death to infidels, death to Westerners, submit to Islam or die ... hey it's just my opinion that I want to share every five minutes even as I'm serving your hamburger" you'd stand up for them? 

And yes you agree on slander, that is speech, so not all speech is covered then. 

Again - a different scenario. A restaurant isn't a platform for you to express your religious opinions and that's on top of that employee being unamicable. What that person says on social media is not my problem though.

Slander isn't just speech - it targets a particular. Like how Colin Moriarty was slandered by the media. Get this right - people should be able to say what they feel as long as they don't promote bodily harm or don't mischaracterise or attack individuals baselessly.