FennRx Posted April 22, 2009 Posted April 22, 2009 yes. unless it is directly inciting the commission of another crime (ie a klan rally calling for the murder of person x) everyone has a right to their uninformed and ignorant opinions. i mean, no one is sending men in black suits to hoyt's house. then again, he does have a machete.
MikeRom Posted April 22, 2009 Posted April 22, 2009 yes. unless it is directly inciting the commission of another crime (ie a klan rally calling for the murder of person x). I agree. Plus it will show other just how stupid the hate mongers are by letting them speak publically.
daveinspain Posted April 22, 2009 Posted April 22, 2009 Free speech should be for everyone no matter what they have to say. No is forced to listen if they don't want to. You can see who a person really is by the words that come out of their mouth. Just beware of the hypocrites...
Notes_Norton Posted April 22, 2009 Posted April 22, 2009 Hate speech is an unfortunate consequence of free speech. The potential abuses of censorship are worse than the hate speech. However, the spreading of lies about another human is libel and is not a valid application of free speech. Notes
djroge1 Posted April 22, 2009 Posted April 22, 2009 It is free speech, however just try and make a very open and public free hate speech against a president just before or during his arrival in your city and your free speech may land you in a temporary holding place to exercise your free speech.
RichCI Posted April 22, 2009 Posted April 22, 2009 What all those guys said above. I won't like what ignorant things some people have to say, but I'll defend the right of their dumb asses to say it.
ckledzepplin Posted April 22, 2009 Posted April 22, 2009 by free speech the creators of the bill of rights ment that people were free to express their opinions.
James Allen Posted April 22, 2009 Posted April 22, 2009 Fenn Rx hit it right on the head. Look, we live in a free society (or used to) where you had the right to speak your mind, but the catch was, you had to listen to the idiot next door speaking his, asl long as he wasn't causing a riot. The problem is, that now, if you are a shock jock, you can say whatever. But, if you are someone trying to get a good debate started, you're called a hater, ignorant, etc. Look at what Garafalo said about the Tea Parties. Those were peaceful demonstrations designed to start a discussion. She calls them all a bunch of racists. Sad.
callen3615 Posted April 22, 2009 Posted April 22, 2009 Fenn Rx hit it right on the head. Look' date=' we live in a free society (or used to) where you had the right to speak your mind, but the catch was, you had to listen to the idiot next door speaking his, asl long as he wasn't causing a riot. The problem is, that now, if you are a shock jock, you can say whatever. But, if you are someone trying to get a good debate started, you're called a hater, ignorant, etc. Look at what Garafalo said about the Tea Parties. Those were peaceful demonstrations designed to start a discussion. She calls them all a bunch of racists. Sad. [/quote'] +1 Shes an idiot.
pippy Posted April 22, 2009 Posted April 22, 2009 Agreeing with all the above but; on a tangent: Mentioning no names (George Clooney) a famous actor was asked about his thoughts on free speech? He said that he was 99% in favour but that didn't include being able to scream "F I R E !" in a crowded Cinema-house. Good point, I thought...........
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.