2006-11-21 07:15:23 · 16 answers · asked by mreed316 7 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Sure. The part people forget is that responsability goes with that freedom. You have the right to say what you want, but you must accept responsability for those words.
2006-11-21 07:24:00 · answer #1 · answered by JB 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The right to Freedom of Speech has limits.
Example: One cannot yell 'FIRE' in a movie theater, unless of course there is one.
There is also society standards of conduct. Not a legislative function, but expressed morals of a community's code of acceptable conduct.
What both men expressed was offensive, but was it illegal? No. But it did go against the grain of acceptable speech by a known personality.
Mel was under the influence. Thank goodness I have not always been held accountable for things I have expressed when under the influence. Mel will recover, he is a great actor and director.
Michael, may or may not have been under the influence of any known drugs. If not, then his comments are even more offensive, IMO.
Forgiveness is the greatest virtue an individual and society can practice. It doesn't imply we forget. Hatred must stop. From those who inflect the act of hatred to those who have the power to forgive.
What would the Master do?
2006-11-21 07:38:31 · answer #2 · answered by Ms. Balls 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is a big difference between freedom of speech and insulting someone. You have the right to speak your mind, but what Mel Gibson and Michael Richards did was trying to insult someone by using racist slurs. For one thing, how would Michael
Richard had know if those men were nigers or not? He didn't know them nor did he have a clue of how they lived. (definition of nigar--lowly lying non working worthless person) Notice how there is not color specified there. Mel Gibson was calling those people jews for a totaly different reason than it just being their race. There is a big difference. I have the right to go and tell stores that I don't have to shop there due to prices, service, whatever. I don't have the right to go in there calling people names for whatever problem I might be having. See the difference? Good luck.
2006-11-21 07:31:04 · answer #3 · answered by cookie 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Of course it applies to them. "Freedom of speech" comes from the first amendment which states, among other things, that Congress shall pass no law prohibiting freedom of speech. Which means, Mel Gibson or Michael Richards won't be arrested for the things they said. But while their speech is rightfully protected by law, that doesn't mean they won't face other consequencesfor making bigoted remarks. They were free to use hateful language, and anyone who wants to is free to condemn them for what they said. That's how it works.
2006-11-21 07:25:58 · answer #4 · answered by CRC83 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes it does, but there is a fine line that shoudn't be crossed. The foul things these two actors spewed was bigotry, pure and simple. You don't see them getting arrested for saying what they said but you do see a backlash because of peoples views, opinions and feelings about what is said. What both of them said was highly offensive to both communities. Just like they have a right to say those things, people have a right to REACT to what is being said.
2006-11-21 09:21:17 · answer #5 · answered by PisceKween 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes but if we don't like what they say we have the right to say so. It is not about free speech it is about avoiding reckless speech if you want to keep your fans.
2006-11-21 07:55:55 · answer #6 · answered by bess 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I hadn't heard that either one had been arrested or legally charged with anything because of their statements. Surely their popularity will plummet. You can say anything you want, but that doesn't mean that there aren't consequences. Your mouth often reveals what's in your hearts, even Jesus felt the need to point that one out.
2006-11-21 07:24:01 · answer #7 · answered by luvwinz 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
They aren't going to jail for saying the things they did, which means they do have freedom of speech. When you're a public figure, the things you say positive or negative carry more weight and scrutiny.
2006-11-21 07:23:28 · answer #8 · answered by No-Dogg 3 · 3⤊ 3⤋
In case you haven't noticed , we didn't totally have free speech. there are hate laws on the books now. Mostly the public demands an apology from someone famous, but an average person would possibly be jailed.
2006-11-21 07:25:20 · answer #9 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
They haven't been arrested for what they said.
Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom of being accountable for your words.
2006-11-21 07:23:38 · answer #10 · answered by R J 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋