| What is free speech? 10:29 - Apr 16 with 1014 views | saint901 |
I was reading over the weekend a debate between various academics, politicians, "influencers" and others about the nature of free speech.
A lot of ground was covered without any evidence of the participants leaving the debate with any other opinion than the one they brought to the table.
One thing that struck me was that some people see a connection between antisemitism and free speech. The argument seems to be that if you exercise your right to say what you wish but it upsets the Jewish community, then you have strayed into insult (or what lawmakers like to label "hate speech"). This "fact" is then used by those who support - for example - the mismatched conflict in Gaza to try to shut down any criticism of (in this example) Israel's actions.
It is also part of Trumps war with Harvard University. His administration claims that unless the university takes action against antisemitism and "protects" free speech, they will have their funding cut and tax position revoked.
In the US it seems that "free speech" is anything that supports the Trump/Republican view and anything which supports a different view is to be squashed - by law if necessary.
That points to a dystopian future for the US and because many countries do not wish to anger the US, by extension, those places as well.
So, does free speech have a beginning and an end where it becomes sufficiently offensive as to cause or incite violence? Does it have to mean whatever the ruling cult says?
This is not about the Israel/Gaza situation or Russia/Ukraine or even Saints/Pompey. No opinions or views here can wrong. |  | | |  |
| What is free speech? on 12:37 - Apr 16 with 927 views | franniesTache |
Free speech is the ability to say what you want without fear of retribution for saying it.
In most countries around the world it is caveated with the fairly sensible caveats that this must have boundaries, those boundaries being that that speech is free up to the point that it causes harm, or speaks untruths that cause harm to others.
The Trump regime's version of free speech, and the american right's idea of free speech, is not even close to being that, it's the idea that they should be able to say what THEY like without retribution, but should be able to control what others say based on their own guard rails.
The current debate in regards the states has much basis in "free speech" as the democratic republic of north korea does in democracy.
As for your question on incitement to violence etc. well most of the world guard against that already, and the philosopher Karl Popper covers it pretty well in his idea "the paradox of tolerance" which is "a philosophical concept suggesting that if a society extends tolerance to those who are intolerant, it risks enabling the eventual dominance of intolerance; thereby undermining the very principle of tolerance.".
Anyway the whole thing is ridiculous anyway, because there is no world in which Trump's regime have even the slightest concern of the protection of "free speech". |  | | |
| What is free speech? on 13:13 - Apr 16 with 901 views | Southamptonfan |
This debate is interesting and is current. I think most would agree that people shouldn't he able to say anything that incites violence and / or could cause harm to anyone. But the debate is spoken about a lot and Trump's election is a symptom of how people feel (in America anyway). It's mostly about the LGBTQ / gender debate I would think. Are people allowed to say freely that they think being gay / trans is wrong or a trans woman competing in female games is wrong? To be clear, that's not my view at all, and would wholly disagree with anyone who said it, but should people have the right to say it, to agree or disagree with something if that's what they think? Are we in a world where we don't know what people actually think? It's easy to say anything that the world / people want to hear, but it doesn't mean they think it or say the same behind closed doors.
There is also the debate about being able to offend (or not). Are you allowed to say someone is fat, or looks like an alien, or they address a trans person as he when they want to be called she, if that's what they think? It might make them a horrible person, or maybe they just think a man is a man and a woman is a woman or perhaps they are religious. But are they allowed to say he to a biological man in a dress, if they wanted to? I think these issues are what it's all about because in America anyway, many felt strongly that they weren't allowed to say things, because they might offend or they were being forced to agree with things they didn't agree with. [Post edited 16 Apr 13:15]
| |
| |
| What is free speech? on 13:35 - Apr 16 with 869 views | franniesTache |
| What is free speech? on 13:13 - Apr 16 by Southamptonfan |
This debate is interesting and is current. I think most would agree that people shouldn't he able to say anything that incites violence and / or could cause harm to anyone. But the debate is spoken about a lot and Trump's election is a symptom of how people feel (in America anyway). It's mostly about the LGBTQ / gender debate I would think. Are people allowed to say freely that they think being gay / trans is wrong or a trans woman competing in female games is wrong? To be clear, that's not my view at all, and would wholly disagree with anyone who said it, but should people have the right to say it, to agree or disagree with something if that's what they think? Are we in a world where we don't know what people actually think? It's easy to say anything that the world / people want to hear, but it doesn't mean they think it or say the same behind closed doors.
There is also the debate about being able to offend (or not). Are you allowed to say someone is fat, or looks like an alien, or they address a trans person as he when they want to be called she, if that's what they think? It might make them a horrible person, or maybe they just think a man is a man and a woman is a woman or perhaps they are religious. But are they allowed to say he to a biological man in a dress, if they wanted to? I think these issues are what it's all about because in America anyway, many felt strongly that they weren't allowed to say things, because they might offend or they were being forced to agree with things they didn't agree with. [Post edited 16 Apr 13:15]
|
People tend to conflate two things in my opinion.
Free speech is the ability to say something you believe in so long as it doesn't cause harm to others.
For example i can say i think all skates are scabs who lie through their teeth and sleep with their family members.
Consequences are the result of what i've said, whether that's i don't get a job, i get kicked off a platform or i get a fist in my face.
The first one is only hampered by governments, for example if a government would throw me in jail or send me to an overseas prison without trial.
The second is just everyday life, and the responsibility to not face the consequences are on me. | | | |
| What is free speech? on 14:39 - Apr 16 with 826 views | saint901 |
Certainly the "what is a woman" question is pertinent given the ruling in the Supreme Court today.
As I understand it, for the purposes of the Equalities Act, a person's sex is determined by their biological sex at birth. References to "sex" and "gender" in that Act, mean biological sex at birth.
Unfortunately I've just listened to a "trans activist" on the radio who claims - without evidence - that 2% of the population (that's more than 1 million people) are now "at risk" of discrimination and potential harm. The presenter stepped in with a few facts from verifiable sources that indicate that the case brought by the Scottish women impacts just 125 people.
For me free speech does not include outright and blatant lies which support an argument.
I have no problems with calling somebody he or she as they choose. I may think that they are deluded or ill or just trying to stand out in a crowd, but that's their choice. However an activist using lies to fake a point is just wrong. | | | |
| What is free speech? on 14:51 - Apr 16 with 813 views | Southamptonfan |
| What is free speech? on 14:39 - Apr 16 by saint901 |
Certainly the "what is a woman" question is pertinent given the ruling in the Supreme Court today.
As I understand it, for the purposes of the Equalities Act, a person's sex is determined by their biological sex at birth. References to "sex" and "gender" in that Act, mean biological sex at birth.
Unfortunately I've just listened to a "trans activist" on the radio who claims - without evidence - that 2% of the population (that's more than 1 million people) are now "at risk" of discrimination and potential harm. The presenter stepped in with a few facts from verifiable sources that indicate that the case brought by the Scottish women impacts just 125 people.
For me free speech does not include outright and blatant lies which support an argument.
I have no problems with calling somebody he or she as they choose. I may think that they are deluded or ill or just trying to stand out in a crowd, but that's their choice. However an activist using lies to fake a point is just wrong. |
Yep, totally agree. but the debate is, I guess - what about the person who does have a problem with calling a biological man a she? What if they are religious and have a certain view? It could be argued as discrimination when should it be? This is what is causing the debate I would guess, and perhaps why some voted for Trump because they feel that they can't say everything they want to say. | |
| |
| What is free speech? on 14:58 - Apr 16 with 801 views | 130yrs_and_one_Cup |
| What is free speech? on 13:35 - Apr 16 by franniesTache |
People tend to conflate two things in my opinion.
Free speech is the ability to say something you believe in so long as it doesn't cause harm to others.
For example i can say i think all skates are scabs who lie through their teeth and sleep with their family members.
Consequences are the result of what i've said, whether that's i don't get a job, i get kicked off a platform or i get a fist in my face.
The first one is only hampered by governments, for example if a government would throw me in jail or send me to an overseas prison without trial.
The second is just everyday life, and the responsibility to not face the consequences are on me. |
OK then Franny
https://www.saintsweb.co.uk/topic/49403-does-southampton-have-a-sex-offender-pro [Post edited 16 Apr 14:59]
|  |
| |
| What is free speech? (n/t) on 15:32 - Apr 16 with 781 views | Southamptonfan |
| What is free speech? on 14:39 - Apr 16 by saint901 |
Certainly the "what is a woman" question is pertinent given the ruling in the Supreme Court today.
As I understand it, for the purposes of the Equalities Act, a person's sex is determined by their biological sex at birth. References to "sex" and "gender" in that Act, mean biological sex at birth.
Unfortunately I've just listened to a "trans activist" on the radio who claims - without evidence - that 2% of the population (that's more than 1 million people) are now "at risk" of discrimination and potential harm. The presenter stepped in with a few facts from verifiable sources that indicate that the case brought by the Scottish women impacts just 125 people.
For me free speech does not include outright and blatant lies which support an argument.
I have no problems with calling somebody he or she as they choose. I may think that they are deluded or ill or just trying to stand out in a crowd, but that's their choice. However an activist using lies to fake a point is just wrong. |
[Post edited 16 Apr 15:33]
| |
| |
| What is free speech? on 16:07 - Apr 16 with 740 views | saint901 |
| What is free speech? on 14:51 - Apr 16 by Southamptonfan |
Yep, totally agree. but the debate is, I guess - what about the person who does have a problem with calling a biological man a she? What if they are religious and have a certain view? It could be argued as discrimination when should it be? This is what is causing the debate I would guess, and perhaps why some voted for Trump because they feel that they can't say everything they want to say. |
I think I would say that if the individual does not wish to use the chosen honourific, then that is them exercise their free speech.
It may offend the recipient but for so long as it's born of genuine reasoning and is not used to insult or degrade, then that is the flip side to free speech. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| What is free speech? on 16:28 - Apr 16 with 720 views | franniesTache |
| What is free speech? on 14:39 - Apr 16 by saint901 |
Certainly the "what is a woman" question is pertinent given the ruling in the Supreme Court today.
As I understand it, for the purposes of the Equalities Act, a person's sex is determined by their biological sex at birth. References to "sex" and "gender" in that Act, mean biological sex at birth.
Unfortunately I've just listened to a "trans activist" on the radio who claims - without evidence - that 2% of the population (that's more than 1 million people) are now "at risk" of discrimination and potential harm. The presenter stepped in with a few facts from verifiable sources that indicate that the case brought by the Scottish women impacts just 125 people.
For me free speech does not include outright and blatant lies which support an argument.
I have no problems with calling somebody he or she as they choose. I may think that they are deluded or ill or just trying to stand out in a crowd, but that's their choice. However an activist using lies to fake a point is just wrong. |
To be honest with you i find the whole trans thing the most ridiculous argument i've seen in a while.
It literally makes no difference to anyone, is none of most people's business, and is just another culture war thing designed to divide us. | | | |
| What is free speech? on 16:41 - Apr 16 with 699 views | 1885_SFC |
 |  |
| |
| What is free speech? on 12:03 - Apr 17 with 552 views | saint901 |
It's easy to get distracted by minority groups who are loud or adept at gathering attention. They are helped of course by a media which thinks it acceptable to point to the alleged flaws and traumas of others in the name of "entertainment" or "public interest".
The internet and a myriad of sources of "news" of course helps and so does a propensity for people to read/watch only those sources which reinforce their views and give them some credence. We have to force ourselves to watch more than one source and even then if what we see enrages us or reduces the integrity of what we think we know, we're inclined to switch off off and ignore it.
For example, the US is more "advanced" down the line of news sources being partisan than perhaps most of Europe and the UK which requires some semblance of balance. I do however try, if an issue interests me, to find two sources and takes, usually MSNBC and Fox News. (Was into Newsmax, but those guys are out with the loony tunes).
Their truth is sometimes difficult to swallow or give weight to but it's their truth and is valid in their eyes and they have a right to express it. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
