Does freedom of speech allow the critique of other's speech as inappropriate?

Answer 1

WHAT FREEDOM? WAKE UP GUY!!!

Answer 2

The First Amendment definitely does not prevent Don Imus or anyone else from saying offensive things, and it does not prevent you or anyone else from saying that those things are offensive. In the context of "free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment", free speech is absolutely irrelevant to one individual criticizing the speech of another individual. The First Amendment reads "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." The subject is Congress. The founders wanted to make sure that the government didn't tell anyone what he could or couldn't say. The 1st amendment free speech doctrine doesn't care what we say to each other as private citizens.

Answer 3

It's perfectly right and just to critique other's speech. You must tolerate the speech, and by tolerate I mean not harass, assault or murder the person speaking. Other than that, feel free to openly criticize what's being said. That's the best part of freedom of speech - it's like the marketplace of ideas. If we all speak up and voice our opinions freely, then may the best idea win!

Answer 4

Yes it does. Again, with freedom comes responsibility. You are also free to disagree with what someone says. Recently it has become vogue to announce a given group has the right to say disparaging remarks about there own race/gender religion/ nationality/ etc., but not about anothers. For instance, Only African -Americans can say the "N" word, or refer to each other in what other people might be considered racist or insensitive. Certain religions get all upset if they are even
benevolently refered to in a humorous manner by non
believers of their faith, but they can say the same thing and its OK. We are all Americans and what one group finds acceptable for itself should be open to all to say or refer to in any manner they wish, as long as the INTENT is not viscious or inflamatory. And the SPEAKER determines intent, not the recipient. The speaker does have a certain responsibility to anyone who might hear what he has to say, but more along the lines of appropriateness and effectiveness of what he wants understood. If someone is offended, it is just as much the responsibility of the listener to accept the speaker has a different viewpoint or perception as it is the speaker to understand the listeners potential position.

Actually, think of this as an anwer to your question.
What if the founding fathers erased the constitution because it might offend England? What if Lincoln didn't sign the emancipaton proclimation because his critics advised him not too? Martin Luther King upset a lot of people. Americans became Americans offending people. It is what we do best, and now unfortunately We the people have forgotten that and have become thin skinned.

Answer 5

I don't think it does. Freedom of speech is guaranteed by the US Constitution. We can say pretty much what we want, but common etiquette demands we have some morals. This is where verbal abuse plays a role. We can disagree with anyone's speech and we have a right to voice our opinions. There is a way where we can state our views and still be assertive! We don't need to be like the "shock jocks" to get heard.

Answer 6

Freedom of speech, freedom to possess firearms and sources rights are no longer privileges that a central authority can enable or use to handle voters for sturdy habit. they're organic rights, meaning you have been born with them once you have been born a unfastened guy. If it grow to be a present day from God or Buddha or Allah or nature or you have been in basic terms born with it. The suppression of those rights is tyranny and tyranny is hardly the path to political stability. at last the serfs gets testy. It grow to be a brilliant element that the Founding Fathers of america of a have been incredible for codifying the suitable of unfastened speech into the form they did no longer invent it, it relatively is as previous as guy.

Answer 7

absolutely. He has the right to say it and you have the right to disagree and criticize what he says... or agree. There shall be no law abridging our freedom of speech and press, according to the US constitution.

However, with freedom comes responsibility and accountability. Someone may have the right to make a rascist statement, but he does not have the right to incite hate crimes / murder of those that he hates. Remember, your freedom ends at the beginning of someone else's nose; if your speech incites someone to take an action that impedes my freedom, you have overstepped the bounds.

Besides to limit the discourse would only serve to limit ourselves and our country. Debate makes a nation strong.

Answer 8

Not at all. With any freedom comes responsibility and potential consequences. I laughed when all the Hollywood liberals thought they could just have their say against the war, and then were surprised and insulted when the vast majority of their audiences booed and insulted them. They thought that freedom of speech means you can say whatever you want and people just smile at you and tolerate it. Not true.

Answer 9

Why Certainly! That's why they took the old Bugs Bunny and Pink Panther Cartoons off the air! So goes Rap and Rock. Thanks Imus for opening that door. Video: Hip Hop We Got Yo' Kidz" available on request at any library!

Answer 10

Of course it does, the right to disagree and exercise your free speach to say so is just as important as the right to say something in the first place.

Answer 11

Of course.