Should people be entitled to their views or should they be censored?

Question

After reading the story about the BNP speakers talking at Oxford University I wondered what your views were on the subject. Personally I think that rational debate is better than censorship but it seems that others disagree. What do you think? Should people be censored for having an incorrect viewpoint or should we accept that we all have different views and allow freedom of speech?

There must be some Andrew or people would never get censored.

Answer 1

Its a shame this question even has to be asked in society. If we are not free to speak our views there is little hope for our future.

Answer 2

The students union at Oxford university had the chance to say no to these 'speakers' coming along. Who knows, they may change their mind at the last minute.
The BNP only believe in free speech for white males born in this country anyway, who are members of their party. They don't give a toss about anyone else.
A few of their policies -
1) They plan to deny the vote to those who cannot do national service.
2) Their view of 'promoting family life' is taking jobs away from women and forcing them to stay at home.
3)To restate the empire again, the Irish republic would be reincorporated with the rest of Britiain.
Is that really democracy?

Answer 3

I'm not sure what happened with the BNP story you read, but here is my 2 cents. I think we have freedom of speech in this country for a reason. Even if we do not agree with someone's opinion or viewpoint, they should have the right to voice it. We should all stand up for each other to have that right.

Someone asked me the other day..."Do you think these religious nuts that are protesting at the funerals of dead soldiers should be allowed to protest and say those horrible things?" My answer is yes, they should be allowed. As much as I disagree and think these people are dispicable, that soldier fought for his/her country for the rights of those idiots to be allowed to stand there and protest. That's what this country is all about. It's also my right to tell them they are nuts and wrong for it, but I would never censor them. Hope that made sense. Great question!

Answer 4

What is an incorrect point of view ? There is no such thing, only incorrect according to the classes in power. Therefore you should have freedom of speech. If you seek to curb that through political correctness then you are following the path of Goebbels, and we all know what political correctness meant under the Nazi regime.

Answer 5

The point of freedom of speech is that everybody is entitled to air their views, regardless of how unsavoury others may find them.

Although I find the views of Mr Griffin and Mr Irving insensitive and inflamatory, I think it totally unacceptable that some people in a democratic and free country think they have the right to shout them down and decry their opinions.

It seems in this country today that we have freedom of speech only so long as it conforms to PC-approved dogma.

Answer 6

There's debate, but there's also incitement to hatred and disturbing the peace. Isn't it basic human law, where it preceeds freedom of speech, to live without fear and harm? These Nazis are doing exactly that, circumventing a basic law for one they propose is fundamental when in reality it (freedom of speech) is a luxury.

Answer 7

Well let's look at it this way;

If we weren't able to say whatever was on our minds, you wouldn't have even be allowed to ask this question. In fact, this entire website wouldn't exist.

I think the problem is that some people take their freedom too far. They think that *they* are right and everyone else is wrong, and some of them are willing to hurt you to prove it.

Answer 8

its not so much about freedom of speech, the problem is that what they are talking about is racist and is inciting racial hatred! also it is falsified facts that they are presenting, i mean one of them is claiming that the holocaust never happened??? wtf? i mean there is no doubt that the holocaust happened there is documented evidence about all the Jews that were killed the only thing that is uncertain is how many were killed! because the nazi's burnt all their records of the massacre.

i am all for freedom of speech but you cannot let people stand up and say that certain people are more important or more worthy than others. what many people don't understand about nazi's is that they weren't just persecuting the Jews, that was just the beginning if they could have carried on they would have taken Christians too, they were after them just as much. and before any of you argue ask yourself this, was Jesus a christian?? no he was a Jew!!!

the problem is that we don't want to go back there, the nazi party are racists and wouldn't just get rid of the Jews, the black people and the Asian people. it is a party that only wants to have white males. they don't particularly like women, they don't like any of the Celts, they don't like any one who is different from them!!!

there's also a huge difference between a debate and just slander! because the nazi party have no real reasons for their xenophobia and this historian has no real evidence that the holocaust didn't happen all its going to be is a racial and bigoted slander ring! personally i wish i could go to it, because there's nothing i like more than to rip someones debate and arguments to shreds!!! and believe you me i would eat both of them alive!!!

Answer 9

Everyone should be entitled to their views.

We have to allow freedom of speech whether we like what each other say or not.

Answer 10

We have free speech, but if you say something derogatory about someone and they sue you for slander or libel, then free speech could become expensive.