Free speech versus hate speech

[orthodoxymoron]

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

"First they came ..." is a popular poem attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group. In Niemöller's first utterance of it, in a January 6, 1946 speech before representatives of the Confessing Church in Frankfurt, it went (in German):[1]

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.

THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."

Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom

[Céline]

Speaking up..is NOt the same as hate speech IMO


Many people share their views, and try to change the status quo...without using insults. That tactic shows weak arguments, nothing else.

[sjkted]

If we say that the Illuminati families are descended from the Reptilians, does that constitute hate speech? Is that a racial slur? Do I need to be locked up or silenced now?

--sjkted

[Céline]

Umm this is a serious question?

Originally Posted by sjkted

If we say that the Illuminati families are descended from the Reptilians, does that constitute hate speech? Is that a racial slur? Do I need to be locked up or silenced now?

--sjkted

[sjkted]

Originally Posted by Céline

Umm this is a serious question?

It's very serious. If you support the notion of censoring hate speech, then this statement can be construed as a racial slur and obviously would be subject to censorship.

--sjkted

[greybeard]

Originally Posted by sjkted

If we say that the Illuminati families are descended from the Reptilians, does that constitute hate speech? Is that a racial slur? Do I need to be locked up or silenced now?

--sjkted

Thats a good question.
In my opinion
If something is a fact rather than just emotionalism in expression then a person should always be free to express the facts and let people make up their own minds.
I think the present laws are sufficient. If something is defamation of character for example one can sue.
If some one is inciting a racial riot Klu Klux style then again the law can take care of it.
However a forum is owned by some one, its their house so to peak, so they are entitled to set their rules whether you agree or not, thats a free society.
There are anti social laws too, so really I think everything is adequately covered.

Regards Chris
Ps we are all reptilian, in that part of the human brain is clearly evolved from reptilian brain and that is a medical fact.

[Céline]

Thank you
\

Originally Posted by greybeard

Thats a good question.
In my opinion
If something is a fact rather than just emotionalism in expression then a person should always be free to express the facts and let people make up their own minds.
I think the present laws are sufficient. If something is defamation of character for example one can sue.
If some one is inciting a racial riot Klu Klux style then again the law can take care of it.
However a forum is owned by some one, its their house so to peak, so they are entitled to set their rules whether you agree or not, thats a free society.
There are anti social laws too, so really I think everything is adequately covered.

Regards Chris
Ps we are all reptilian, in that part of the human brain is clearly evolved from reptilian brain and that is a medical fact.

[sjkted]

Originally Posted by greybeard

Thats a good question.
In my opinion
If something is a fact rather than just emotionalism in expression then a person should always be free to express the facts and let people make up their own minds.
I think the present laws are sufficient. If something is defamation of character for example one can sue.
If some one is inciting a racial riot Klu Klux style then again the law can take care of it.
However a forum is owned by some one, its their house so to peak, so they are entitled to set their rules whether you agree or not, thats a free society.
There are anti social laws too, so really I think everything is adequately covered.

Regards Chris
Ps we are all reptilian, in that part of the human brain is clearly evolved from reptilian brain and that is a medical fact.

So, basically you are saying that if I am sure the Illuminati are descended from the Reptilians and that it is a fact I could prove in a court of law, I ought to be allowed to say it.

If it is just my opinion, theory, or emotional nature expressing itself, I should not be allowed to express it?

This reminds me of the holocaust official theory. Anyone who looks deeper and deeper into the details finds there is some big holes in the official story. Yes, people died and there were atrocities, but there are some big picture items that don't add up. It is illegal in much of Europe to question or theorize about alternative ideas as one might do in presenting a legal argument, so it will be impossible for the truth to come out into the mainstream.

This is exactly what happens when you censor anything other than death threats -- the truth becomes obfuscated and people get confused about reality and the younger generations get brainwashed because they don't know what is real. Generations later, the children are complete idiots because they don't know the reality of anything about anything or even how to find out. Welcome to 2010!

Cheers,

--sjkted

[greybeard]

Hi sjkted
I can only speak for myself.
I honestly dont mind what people say.
I have choice I dont have to listen or read.
I would not however be happy if some one was trying to force an opinion on me personally.
Particularly if the intention was to have me take sides and outlaw some one else.
Im speaking generally.
Gobels said that if you tell a lie often enough people will believe it.

The lie was so powerful that it led to world war two and the German race was miss-led into following a meglomaniac who wanted to dominate the world. If he had won your freedom of speech would not exist.
I dont blame the Germans, if I had been a German I would have believed that I was doing the right thing for "The Fatherland" and laid down my life with millions of others.
So yes free speech--- the speech of incitement that provokes war, small or big time, definitely not.

I have responded in the context of the words Free speech vs hate speech.
Not in line with others posts. I am not taking sides. Taking sides just alienates people.
Chris

[sjkted]

Originally Posted by greybeard

Hi sjkted
I can only speak for myself.
I honestly dont mind what people say.
I have choice I dont have to listen or read.
I would not however be happy if some one was trying to force an opinion on me personally.
Particularly if the intention was to have me take sides and outlaw some one else.
Im speaking generally.
Gobels said that if you tell a lie often enough people will believe it.

The lie was so powerful that it led to world war two and the German race was miss-led into following a meglomaniac who wanted to dominate the world. If he had won your freedom of speech would not exist.
I dont blame the Germans, if I had been a German I would have believed that I was doing the right thing for "The Fatherland" and laid down my life with millions of others.
So yes free speech--- the speech of incitement that provokes war, small or big time, definitely not.

I have responded in the context of the words Free speech vs hate speech.
Not in line with others posts. I am not taking sides. Taking sides just alienates people.
Chris

Yes, of course free speech means that anyone can lie including the government. People can be mislead by lies -- no doubt about it.

I've done quite a bit of research on WWII including college German language classes in German history. I just don't believe that a majority of the people believed the lie. Just like now, many people choose not to believe anything is wrong in the world, especially with the economy. This includes many very intelligent people I know. Despite the overwhelming evidence that numerous things are very far amiss, these people and many others choose to stick their heads in the sand.

I can already hear their words. It will be the same words as the Germans. We didn't know. Nobody knew. It was unexpected. None of the Germans knew about the camps. None of them knew about the Nazi atrocities, yet they feel guilty afterwards, despite the fact that they didn't know.

How many real dissenters did the Nazi party have? Who knows? They would have been the first to go to the camps. People who knew about it would not have felt free to speak of who these people were and what happened to them. I mean seriously, do you really believe 100% of the Germans bought into the whole thing? I haven't ever read an account of anyone who attempted to spread the truth about the Nazi party or expose it's lies.

The problem is that they didn't want to know. People don't want to hear the economy is collapsing, because it means on some level they were a sucker, they did some stupid things, and they participated in a system that was unethical. Many people keep status quo, because they would not be able to cope or function, if they went past the mainstream. That is not the same as saying they believed the lie.

So, what's the solution? If you make free speech illegal, there will still be lies told to people. The government will lie either way, so making free speech illegal won't make a difference. I've already demonstrated that making hate speech illegal will quickly turn towards larger forms of censorship.

In my mind, the difference is that if people are freely allowed to express all of their thoughts, the truth cannot be covered and everyone will not be living a lie. Sure, some gullible people will be misled and some people will accept ideologies that are not based in truth, but at the very least the truth will be out there for individuals to discover. Without completely free speech, we are doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over in history and not even know we are doing that.

--sjkted

[greybeard]

Originally Posted by orthodoxymoron

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

"First they came ..." is a popular poem attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group. In Niemöller's first utterance of it, in a January 6, 1946 speech before representatives of the Confessing Church in Frankfurt, it went (in German):[1]

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.

THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."

Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom

Free speech is a misnomer.
It came at a high price, it had to be paid for with the lives of many.
So it must be respected.
That which is abused is weakened and lost.
That which is respected is strengthened and wholesome .

With respect and love
Chris