Does freedom of speech really exist?

Question

Who believes individuals truly can say whatever they wish to express without fear of reprocussions? Why or why not?

Please allow me to clarify one area of my question. When I posted this question in politics, I did not neccessarily mean governmental poitics, which is why I chose the option other poitics. I am asking in terms of person to person, human to human, citizens of the planet Earth, not necessarily a singular country. If anyone wishes to edit and expound on this plane, please do so and I thank you.

Answer 1

After your clarification my edited answer is this:

Not everywhere and not with everyone. It's situational and entirely depends on where you live and the company you keep. The only place freedom of speech exists is in one's own mind, where there are no repercussions about your own private thoughts and opinions.

Answer 2

In America, the bill of rights gives the citizens the power of freedom of speech. There are some people in society who obey the rules and there are some that scrutinise and try to opress.

Those who opress such statute have taken the meaning of 'freedom of speech' out of context.

You should all be so lucky to have been granted such a gift. In Australia for example, it is not a right. Many countries the world over are resticted when it comes to expressing opinions - so instead of critisicing what you have, you should try to appreaciate it.

Answer 3

This brings up a pointed question. Free Speech is diminishing the Bush Administration's resolve to do exactly what? Impose their narrow views on the world? Do anything they want, without resorting to ethics, morals, laws, and/or justification? Why does this sound similar to Adolph Hitler's obsession with the Fatherland, his phrase, "Deutschland uber alles" (Germany over all others), or something his Minister of Propaganda might have said in a PR moment?

The rather terrifying aspect is that George Bush and his neo-conservative axis of evil members are actively attempting to silence and condemn anyone who disagrees with their extremely narrow Christian fundamentalism and hidden world-conquest agendas. By use of the Patriot Act -- predicated by the 9-11-2001 failure of this same federal government to act appropriately -- and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, these knee-jerk... jerks are attempting with the force of law to impose their views on others, elicit the cooperation of others of like mind, and using financial and other pressures encourage similar compromises of free speech by other organizations and individuals. That is why we must challenge the rationale of the Patriot Act. We must ask why should America put aside guarantees of constitutional justice?

How can we justify in effect canceling The First Amendment and the right of free speech, the right to peaceably assemble?

How can we justify in effect canceling the Fourth Amendment, probable cause, the prohibitions against unreasonable search and seizure?

How can we justify in effect canceling the Fifth Amendment, nullifying due process, and allowing for indefinite incarceration without a trial?

How can we justify in effect canceling the Sixth Amendment, the right to prompt and public trial?

How can we justify in effect canceling the Eighth Amendment which protects against cruel and unusual punishment?

Answer 4

It no longer exists within the USA. Any dissent from the Neocon position gets you immediately attacked. During political conventions the government has been setting up what they call "Free Speech Zones" for people to gather and protest well out of view of the convention or any news organization. The very term "Free Speech Zone" implies that the rest of the country isn't one.

Answer 5

Freedom of speech, like freedom in general, requires one to think about the consequences of one's words or actions, and to take the consequences.

When we, in America, talk about "freedom of speech" in a political context, we are generally referring to the First Ammendment to the Constitution, which prohibits certain restrictions on speech, thought, religion, and assembly. It says nothing about saying whatever you want, without taking the consequences.

You have every right to tell your boss he's a fat pig. This doesn't mean there won't be consequences.

But some consequences are prohibited by law.

Answer 6

Yes! Say what you want and when you want. Don't be afraid someone won't like you. I have a lot more respect for someone who totally disagrees with me and says so then I do for people who say something because they think that is what I want to hear. Will you suffer the consequences? Of course and some people will hate you. I don't say things to upset people but if someone asks me a question or wants "my opinion" I will give it to them free of charge. People might hit you and they might scream at you but that's part of the deal. Such is life in the big city.

Answer 7

Yes as long as one is ready to face the consequences.

Consequences may differ from one place to another depending on the people in power and others.

Rushdie who wrote Satanic Verses is marked to be killed.

Bertrand Russel who wrote Why I am not a Christian was found unfit to teach in a US university.

Malicious, or hateful speech is really not free speech. But then who decides??

Answer 8

No. because your question could be pulled just like that.

Absolute freedom of speech should not exist. But freedom to criticize government and to dissent is an absolute must.

Answer 9

Dear Heart: yes freedom of speech really does
exist but since the freedom goes both ways, there
will be repercussions as each side has the same
freedom to speak. (actually, some people would be
better off keeping their mouth shut).

Answer 10

Freedom of speech is real but you have to be willing to accept the repercussions of your speech. It should be call Cost of Speech because you might have to pay the price for what you say, but no one can stop you from saying it.