Do you BELIEVE in Freedom of Speech?

[derpkitteh]

Remove moderation from MMO-Champion for 1 week. I bet you it would be complete and total chaos.

well, this is the internet. i figure she was meaning irl.

the internet removes most of the potential for you to be injured by the person you're insulting, so things get heavy easily.

irl, people aren't gonna change much from how they are now.

[Kathandira]

Haha. I love ziltoid.. btw... does this truck make my neck look red?

Nah, it's the overalls, and swampers.

- - - Updated - - -

well, this is the internet. i figure she was meaning irl.

the internet removes most of the potential for you to be injured by the person you're insulting, so things get heavy easily.

irl, people aren't gonna change much from how they are now.

I think this should be a golden rule to all communication. 'Will saying this make the person want to punch me in the face?' If the answer is yes, or even likely, it should prolly not be said.

[Frogguh]

So you're opposed to their freedom of speech, and their right to assembly? And you're trying to claim they are "authoritarian"?

Forming violent mobs, assaulting people, destroying property, and using the threat of violence to intimidate people into silence are not covered under freedom of speech. The left is indeed authoritarian, and is not self-aware enough to be able to differentiate between a contrary opinion and violence (it used to be confused with bigotry, now there are left-wing nutjobs saying these contrary opinions are actual violence).

There used to be some aspects of the left I could respect or at least sympathize with, but not anymore. They all seem to agree with this lunacy, or are too gutless to speak out and support the conservatives, who are obviously correct on this topic.

[McFuu]

Sure I believe in free speech. With protections. The US is probably the best example in the world of how to do free speech including regulations.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

well, this is the internet. i figure she was meaning irl.

the internet removes most of the potential for you to be injured by the person you're insulting, so things get heavy easily.

irl, people aren't gonna change much from how they are now.

So...here's an example

Two girls are walking through safeway holding hands. A man comes up to them and starts following them around and screaming at them for being "fucking dykes", that they're "disgusting", They should be fucking killed...etc. You believe this man is just utilizing his first amendment rights and Safeway has no authority to kick him out?

[Gamer8585]

Just an FYI since I've seen this come up: Yelling fire in a crowded theater is NOT illegal.

The phrase came from non-binding dicta in "Schenck v. United States." And was narrowed in the courts reasoning in "Brandenburg v. Ohio" to only apply to "Imminent lawless action."

See also "Hess v. Indiana".

[Dezerte]

Limited free speech in respect to private ownership of property, additionally any speech that is inciting violence or hate should be dealt with in some unspecified manner.

[docterfreeze]

Anyone should be able to state their opinions without consequence, "hate speech" or not. It's up to the people hearing them to judge whether they agree or disagree, an authoritative figure should never be a filter.

[satimy]

So you're opposed to their freedom of speech, and their right to assembly? And you're trying to claim they are "authoritarian"?

What do you mean opposed? I said I considered it speech, Similar to a bunch of neo nazis marching around a Jewish deli is speech. If people want to form mobs and intimidate people in to not speaking It's speech. Once you start to use violence though I would consider it crossing the line. It's certainly an odd line that leads to circular logic, but I do believe that being an open minded individual falls under the umbrella of freedom of speech as well

- - - Updated - - -

I mean, when you say "the left" do you mean private citizens that are not apart of the government and therefor do not have to comply to freedom of speech rights, or do you mean politicians and other forms of leftist government that most certainly must comply with freedom of speech rights?

When you say things as meaninglessly vague as "the left", you lose all context in your argument because those laws are applied differently between private citizens and public servants, both of whom can be considered "the left".

Edit: And people that don't like Milo won't go to his event. But they are also going to protest his free speech, as is their free speech rights. Stop acting like the right didn't just spend 8 years protesting a black "librlul" president and his awfully republican health care plan or crucifying a secretary of state for using the same type of email server our sitting vice president uses.

So your argument is the people that protested Milo are as bad as the worst of the tea party? I'm assuming u
You condemn them as well then.

[Calfredd]

There used to be some aspects of the left I could respect or at least sympathize with, but not anymore. They all seem to agree with this lunacy, or are too gutless to speak out and support the conservatives, who are obviously correct on this topic.

Please don't lie, you are one of those people that constantly complain about "dirty leftists ruining America". You are just as bad as those people who also think those "greedy righties are destroying America to line their own pockets".

[Endus]

Forming violent mobs, assaulting people, destroying property, and using the threat of violence to intimidate people into silence are not covered under freedom of speech.

Nobody claimed they were.

The left is indeed authoritarian, and is not self-aware enough to be able to differentiate between a contrary opinion and violence (it used to be confused with bigotry, now there are left-wing nutjobs saying these contrary opinions are actual violence).

In this case, "the left" is your imaginary boogeyman, since it doesn't actually reflect any actual appreciable political movement, and certainly not the vast majority of us who espouse left-wing viewpoints.

[Oftenwrongsoong]

Simple question, do you believe in Freedom of Speech?

Which includes anything you say or post online, even bullying speech should be protected.

I do, and I think everyone's ideas and thoughts should be protected under freedom of speech.

Thankfully in the US we have the 1st Amendment which protects freedom of speech, and I know most other countries have similar laws protecting freedom of speech.

Though the message was hidden because I have you on ignore (fun aside, that's me lawfully restricting your speech!), I bet myself $100 that you wouldn't know what FOS is.

Turns out I'm right. Also, +1 for click bait because I'm sure you know that what you said is absolutely wrong and misconstrues FOS, but you wanted people to talk about why you're wrong and then go down the trolling rabbit hole. You're a tricky troll, Trump of MMO-C.

Anyway, freedom of Speech under the First Amendment is not even remotely close to what you describe as FOS. It only applies to government actors, in other words, a government actor cannot squelch your ability to freely express yourself so long as you are not spouting un-protected speech (e.g., fire in a theater).

Regardless, private citizens like me, your parents, or corporations like Blizzard, can lawfully squelch, silence, ban, mute, and restrict anything you say.

[Machismo]

I fully believe in freedom of speech. I also believe in people being held accountable by the private marketplace for their speech. I do enjoy when some bigoted asshat spouts off about a particular class of people he despises, then gets fired for it. The first thing people do, is cry that his First Amendment rights were violated. Sorry, that's how freedom of speech is supposed to work.

[Nihilist74]

I think you should be able to say whatever opinion you want but i think it should be illegal to threaten anyone.

[Deleted]

Not exactly. You can be arrested for saying certain things. We don't have the Freedom of speech that others may think. Some think it is absolute. But if I were in proximity of the President, and I said I want to kill him, I would have secret service pounce all over me, and I would be thrown in jail.

Yeah the fire in a theatre example. But also 'national security'. And those secret courts. (UK has some of these too)

[DSRilk]

Simple question, do you believe in Freedom of Speech?

Which includes anything you say or post online, even bullying speech should be protected.

I do, and I think everyone's ideas and thoughts should be protected under freedom of speech.

Thankfully in the US we have the 1st Amendment which protects freedom of speech, and I know most other countries have similar laws protecting freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech as protected by the 1st Amendment has nothing to do with any of your definitions of free speech. Beyond that, your question is painfully simplistic when the reality is extremely complex. Pretty much ALL people think there should be some limits on speech. The question is, what should those limits be. Fire in a crowded building? Threatening someone's life? Attempting to sway others to murder people? Discriminating against people due to race? Religion? Being verbally abusive to your children on a regular basis? What about protections from consequences of said speech? Most everyone is okay with limits for some of these, but probably not all of them. THAT is where the discussion is. NOT the absurdly kindergarten-esque "do you believe in freedom of speech."

[derpkitteh]

So...here's an example

Two girls are walking through safeway holding hands. A man comes up to them and starts following them around and screaming at them for being "fucking dykes", that they're "disgusting", They should be fucking killed...etc. You believe this man is just utilizing his first amendment rights and Safeway has no authority to kick him out?

following them around? that's harassment.

calling them a bad name in passing? freedom of speech.

[Machismo]

I believe in freedom of speech, and the consequences that come from it. If a person wishes to bully someone, to the point where that person is threatened, then that person also has the freedom to defend himself or herself. Someone else may also step in and defend that person.

[Kathandira]

following them around? that's harassment.

calling them a bad name in passing? freedom of speech.

The follow I don't think is harassment. But the repeating barrage of insults/mockery would be.

[derpkitteh]

The follow I don't think is harassment. But the repeating barrage of insults/mockery would be.

i think it's a combination. following them is a confrontational behavior, coupled with repeated insults, that's definitely harassment.