Should Hateful/Racist/Sexist Comments Be 'Banned' On Social Media?

[Kraenen]

no we just value it as a concept more then just how it protects us from the government. free speech as a concept is about letting everyone openly state what they think, open discussion and dialog with no one being able to say "no you cant say that ". its about letting the best idea win thru discussion and not silencing the other ideas.

this is describing it much better than I did ^.^

[Themius]

We are talking about you saying that it is your private property and you can do whatever the fuck you want with it, and I am simply pointing out that spaces open to the public have certain rules to it. I can say that I don't want black people to come into my house, but if my house was a store, I could not. And this discussion is also about if it should be allowed to ban certain kinds of speech, aka not allowing free speech on a public platform used for communication, aka social media.

You really don't seem to get it, you're trying to merge two different things and argue from there, you can't...

You can ban speech in your store you know, you don't have to entertain a random say kkk member in your store, he can speak outside, but he doesn't have a right to preach in your fucking store.

[Raelbo]

Who is to say what is hate and bigotry then?

Practically speaking, this is a challenge to get right. That doesn't change the principle though.

The fact is that some speech qualifies almost unanamously as hate speech and most people with any kind of sensibility would immediately recognise it as such. Such speech does nothing constructive and only serves to rile up people and is intended to cause harm. There is no reason why such speech should be tolerated in any society.

That being said, of course there is other stuff which falls into a grey area, and there will be divided opinions on whether it is something that falls under free speech or is just plain old hate/bigotry.

Now we can debate where that line sits but that doesn't change my answer to the actual question being asked.

[Canpinter]

Oh fuck that stupid bullshit. "Let the best idea win don't silence others" well if history has proven anything it's that people sure to love to follow those stupid ideas that lead to many ills on society.

Let's say there's a person in my park who is just calling all latino people visinting my park spics. He doesn't actually argue anything he just keeps calling them all spics. Well it's my private park "you get the fuck out, you offer nothing"

- - - Updated - - -



"It's not hate speech, you're just a pussy who can't argue so you want to silence the man who is trying to rile up an army to take out a muslim town upstate."

as i have said many times you draw the line at threats or calls for violence. and im glad you have taken it upon yourself to deiced what is and isn't a good idea for humanity to follow.

[Nitro Fun]

There is no reason why such speech should be tolerated in any society.

I guess it's better to lock up people you don't like than allowing them to have the same freedoms as the people you do like.

[Themius]

as i have said many times you draw the line at threats or calls for violence. and im glad you have taken it upon yourself to deiced what is and isn't a good idea for humanity to follow.

are you telling me, if a person walks into your store and just starts saying to you and everyone that "you're just a bunch of stupid mother fuckers" that you don't have a right to just kick him out? Or rather that you don't want it because "free speech yeah!"

[Raelbo]

and who would you trust to define what is and isn't hate and bigotry?

Irrelevant to the principle.

[Themius]

I guess it's better to lock up people you don't like than allowing them to have the same freedoms as the people you do like.

Who is locking up people by sayig "shut up, or go elsewhere."

[Raelbo]

I guess it's better to lock up people you don't like than allowing them to have the same freedoms as the people you do like.

Nice strawman

[Kraenen]

are you telling me, if a person walks into your store and just starts saying to you and everyone that "you're just a bunch of stupid mother fuckers" that you don't have a right to just kick him out? Or rather that you don't want it because "free speech yeah!"

you're a bit dense. but it's early in the morning so I'll give you that.

this just comes down to your misconception that free speech is only something to do with government or legal rights.

[Canpinter]

are you telling me, if a person walks into your store and just starts saying to you and everyone that "you're just a bunch of stupid mother fuckers" that you don't have a right to just kick him out? Or rather that you don't want it because "free speech yeah!"

difference between a store that exist to sell shit and a media platform for communication.

[Zogarth]

You really don't seem to get it, you're trying to merge two different things and argue from there, you can't...

You can ban speech in your store you know, you don't have to entertain a random say kkk member in your store, he can speak outside, but he doesn't have a right to preach in your fucking store.

We are not talking about if you can ban speech, but if you should. And again, perhaps talking about a store or a public space is kind of counterproductive as it is quite different from social media. If we had to take it to a physical location, it would be like having a public center for communication and debate, and then tell certain people that they can't join in because you disagree with them.

Practically speaking, this is a challenge to get right. That doesn't change the principle though.

The fact is that some speech qualifies almost unanamously as hate speech and most people with any kind of sensibility would immediately recognise it as such. Such speech does nothing constructive and only serves to rile up people and is intended to cause harm. There is no reason why such speech should be tolerated in any society.

That being said, of course there is other stuff which falls into a grey area, and there will be divided opinions on whether it is something that falls under free speech or is just plain old hate/bigotry.

Now we can debate where that line sits but that doesn't change my answer to the actual question being asked.

Give me one example of indisputable example of hate/bigotry?

[Thelin]

No, I believe in free speech.

And? Yes you're free to say what you want, you're not free from the consequences. Those businesses are also private companies and can therefore establish policies they see fit. Filtering hate speech, profanity, racism, sexism, etc is all certainly within the realm of a companies righ to do, especially one that has to maintain a certain rating for age requirements. I love this stupid stance on free speech, the 1st amendment isn't a get out of jail free card.

[GennGreymane]

are you telling me, if a person walks into your store and just starts saying to you and everyone that "you're just a bunch of stupid mother fuckers" that you don't have a right to just kick him out? Or rather that you don't want it because "free speech yeah!"

From my experience on posting all over the interwebs.... I cant think of a single person who was banned for their view, but was banned for calling people monkeys, niggers, sand niggers, chinks, faggots, and stating things like, "all white people should die", "cops should die", "You're a fucking nigger, you dont belong here", "Trump will kill all you Chinese", "You're just a greedy fucking Jew", etc, etc..... people tend to hide it behind their "edgy opinions".

*dont ban me for the condensed edge mods, its just me stating examples of how people normally get banned from what I see on numerous sites*

[Canpinter]

Irrelevant to the principle.

Perfectly relevant because i very much doubt you would be in favor of banning hate speech if that ignoramus donald trump got to define it.

[Kraenen]

And? Yes you're free to say what you want, you're not free from the consequences. Those businesses are also private companies and can therefore establish policies they see fit.

and those policies can obviously be anti- free speech as is their legal right to do so

[Hyve]

I think it's totally up to the website owners. If they decide to allow it, and you disagree, use another website. If they decide to disallow it, and you disagree, use another website.

There are some horrific things that are posted to people, like that guy (Source) who decided to post hateful messages on a Facebook group that was a memorial to dead children. The thing is, people like that, are scum and I'm glad most places ban / deal with these people, and that even the authorities are dealing with them too.

[primalmatter]

No. When you chase dangerous opinions away they grow as a undercurrent.

Challenge them. If they hold then they are worth considering if they don't they die out quickly on a public platform.

[Nitro Fun]

Nice strawman

Not a strawman, that's where people always end up when they start restricting people from doing things.

[Raelbo]

Not a strawman, that's where people always end up when they start restricting people from doing things.

Dude, that's the very definition of a strawman.

- - - Updated - - -

Perfectly relevant because i very much doubt you would be in favor of banning hate speech if that ignoramus donald trump got to define it.

Oh I would absolutely still be in favour of banning hate speech. But I would object to the accepted definition thereof.