When does Free Speach cross the line?

A provocateur knows that he rubs some people up the wrong way, so he takes a calculated risk. The murderer misses some essential emotional developments in his psychological development. He isn't mad but can't hold himself in check.
So imo the murderer is most certainly at fault. Everybody knows that to kill is wrong. If you lack this, you should not walk the streets and he won't ever again.

I just don't want to say: A is killed by B so B is at fault, A actions are not important. Why I am not murdered and he is?
 
Ted said:
Why I am not murdered and he is?
Click to expand...

Because he publicly said things that the Islamists feared and countered. You never did, that's why.
Go on tv and start saying you believe all the immigrants should go back home because they represent a threat to your identity (=this would surely not be illegal to say), and then see if you feel as safe as before.
 
No, you are wrong on this occasion IG. What got to the muslims wasn't fear. The fact that he called them retards who have sex with goats is what got to them. And to tell you the truth. If he would have said that to me he would have another thing coming too.
The big difference is that some unbalanced, clouded no brainer took this as something to kill him for.

And if I had an issue with the muslims, I wouldn't go on the tube, insult them far beyond decency and not engage in a debate. I would look for an open and sometimes spicey debat But stigmatizing an entire group before any is said and done...... I think it's wrong!
 
Yes I see your point but this in no way justifies a murder.
It might explain it as much as you want, but it does not justify it.
And I keep begging to differ on the nature of the action. I see a contradiction between your "The killer was just an isolated idiot" and "Van Gogh looked for it because he'd been insulting the Muslims for so long".
Was that the action of one mentally unstable person or the obvious reaction of the Muslims?
 
I will never justify murder as a means to settle any dispute! I admit to your:
Van Gogh looked for it because he'd been insulting the Muslims for so long".
Click to expand...

Van Gogh looked for a debate on his terms in his pre-set conditions. I truelly think that he looked at the issue from a very very liberal western, Dutch "everything must be possible" kind of way. I think that he underestimated the "need to destroy" of the fanatic Islamists.

When he was murdered many people came to the Dam in Amsterdam, the heart of Amsterdam for "The march of noise" because we wouldn't be silenced by such agression. Many muslims were at the demonstration and spoke publicly of this infamous deed. But there was also a seizable group of young muslims, who are more radical then their parents who spoke of "he had it coming". They showed understanding, but would not do it themselves. Where their usually is a 85 - 15 for mainstream islam, in this case I guess it was more 70 - 30 for denouncing this deed.

(I hope you understand my numbers :))
 
No problem.... the pleasure was all mine! Although you had me racking my brains on how to clear this one out!
 
free speech in the U.S. has never been 'free', the cost is responsiblity for 'your' actions and words....you can say what you wish as long as you are willing to be held accountable for those words and actions....if not, don't say them or do the actions that result....
 
I have found that many reporters are not interested in free speech they are just interested in the story. Now if by sending out a story whether it be true or false has little concern for them, or if leads to people being killed it has nothing to do with them for this is the Freedom Of speech.
 
That is why I said that what this movie-maker did, had little to do with freedom of speech.
I see it in a more historical context. It started for the masses to protest the absolute rule of the monarchy or other form of government. They wanted more rights in a time where you weren't allowed to vote, no welfare, 7 day working week etc. The early beginning was done by humanists and scientists like Erasmus and Galileo.
No it has turned into a shield were you hide behind when you insult people who think differently, have another religion or culture. If you get penalized for inciting hatred you'll claim your 2nd amendment is getting infringed. Effective and simple!
 
Effective and simple!
Click to expand...
not really.
A person should know when he has crossed the line. Then apologize, there absolutely is no room for ethical,religious, or sexist remarks. period.
simple is making it sound to much like a game.'like, ill insult someone and then just use the good ole 2nd to get me out of a mudhole.'
 
Main Entry: slander
Function: noun
Etymology: Anglo-French esclandre, from Old French escandle esclandre scandal, from Late Latin scandalum moral stumbling block, disgrace, from Greek skandalon, literally, snare, trap
1 : defamation of a person by unprivileged oral communication made to a third party; also : defamatory oral statements
2 : the tort of oral defamation <sued his former employer for slander> —compare [SIZE=-1]DEFAMATION[/SIZE], [SIZE=-1]FALSE LIGHT[/SIZE], [SIZE=-1]LIBEL[/SIZE]
NOTE: An action for slander may be brought without alleging and proving special damages if the statements in question have a plainly harmful character, as by imputing to the plaintiff criminal guilt, serious sexual misconduct, or conduct or a characteristic affecting his or her business or profession. —slan·der·ous /'slan-d&-r&s/ adjective —slan·der·ous·ly adverb —slan·der·ous·ness noun


http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=slander

Among other things.
 
One must consider the argument in light of the intent of the founding fathers and then separate "myth" from reality. Slander, if based on facts, does not violate free speech.
 
I was thinking of this thread as I viewed again "300"... "Before you speak know that in Sparta a man is held accountable for the words of his voice, even a king's messenger."

Just like "freedom", free speech is not free. There is a price to pay for having those things with which we associate the word freedom- sacrifice, laws, service. Likewise the price with free speech is responsibility and accountability for the things you say. You are allowed to say them but it is not a blank cheque with which you may defame, insult or libel with impunity.
 
bulldogg said:
I was thinking of this thread as I viewed again "300"... "Before you speak know that in Sparta a man is held accountable for the words of his voice, even a king's messenger."

Just like "freedom", free speech is not free. There is a price to pay for having those things with which we associate the word freedom- sacrifice, laws, service. Likewise the price with free speech is responsibility and accountability for the things you say. You are allowed to say them but it is not a blank cheque with which you may defame, insult or libel with impunity.
Click to expand...

Here here! It has been a while since I last agreed so whole heartedly on a post. Yes, there is a price to pay for free speach and that is why so few really dare to speak the mind when it matters. Only the brave speak when the penalty for speaking is known...
 
bulldogg said:
I was thinking of this thread as I viewed again "300"... "Before you speak know that in Sparta a man is held accountable for the words of his voice, even a king's messenger."

Just like "freedom", free speech is not free. There is a price to pay for having those things with which we associate the word freedom- sacrifice, laws, service. Likewise the price with free speech is responsibility and accountability for the things you say. You are allowed to say them but it is not a blank cheque with which you may defame, insult or libel with impunity.
Click to expand...

And that is the whole point. Unfortunately people are not held responsible for their speech. Only their action. If more people were held responsible for any sewage that comes out of their mouth I would be willing to bet that more people would learn to express themselves in a fair manner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top