not to mention blasphemy and laws against incitement, victimisation and discrimination...Why on Earth would anyone seriously imagine we have a right to free speech?
We don't and we never have had. We only have the right to say what the politicians of the day permit us to don't we?
2007-07-30 01:40:54 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
This question appears to have drawn some rather heated responses. I asked this question because of my constant amazement at how many people on this site justify what they say with this mythical notion that we have freedom of speech.
2007-07-30 03:14:12 · update #1
There's a quote from a Bill Hicks DVD that really stuck in my mind - he was ranting about the government and the president.
Speaking as the president:
"You are free to do what we tell you".
As relevant after his death than the day he first said it.
2007-07-30 01:51:13 · answer #1 · answered by no_preconceived_ideas 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
What children's classroom did you learn THIS definition of "Free Speech" in?
This is like the United States classrooms that teach that we live in a "Democracy".
First, someone makes something up, then you blame reality for not living up to the imaginary expectation.
1) Free speech doesn't give you the right to damage others.
2) Free speech doesn't give you the right to encourage others to damage others.
How dare they restrict such speech! I've read about the the police raids on pubs and up and down university campuses...oh, wait, I haven't read that.
People are still saying much of this and only getting arrested if they make a noisy nuisance of themselves with it.
Is this what you want to do?
Get past the myths about being able to flail about without regard for others as a personal right from God.
Real life has other people in it.
2007-07-30 08:48:53 · answer #2 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
We have had free speech. Back before the Romans invaded.
It is the nature of society that in order to live alongside each other, that individual freedoms have to be sacrificed for the collective good. Examples are the restriction of freedoms for those thought to be involved in anti-socal behaviour.
For example, if you allow to have the freedom of speech spread malicious lies about someone, why should deny the right of the person who has had lies spread about them to engage in physical violence to 'correct' the situation.
Now, if you want to live in a society where you have real restricions on freedom of speech, I suggest you check out China and Burma.
2007-07-30 09:17:16 · answer #3 · answered by The Patriot 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
i have told a few people on here that freedom of speech has restrictions. they took offence and blocked me. but yes you are right in everything you are saying.
2007-07-30 09:08:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well how many freedoms are absolute and without any limits?
Responsibility is always linked to freedom.
2007-07-30 08:49:08 · answer #5 · answered by cprime17 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Welcome to the Soviet Socialist Republic of petty-minded Britain
2007-07-30 08:44:21 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋