Clarence Thomas Thinks Free Speech Should Be Regulated

[Felya]

I was thinking every third song could be

With video accompanying.

First... the most annoying Queen song is Bicycle... plus second... Tutsi and Some Like it Hot... equals cognitive dissonance of dancing to Rage Against the Machine, with a Blue lives mater flag...

Gibberish, that sounds like satanic worship, is so much better...

[Felya]

I mean. Bicycle is annoying, but c’mon. Does it have Freddy writhing all over people for an entire section of the song? The visual alone will crush their brain.

Yeah, even visuals, I think going satanic would have a much better effect. They will think yours is gross, with mine... they will be in a confessional for days... yours corrupts the youth, mine eats them...

Edit: We can’t have a thread on most effective ways to freak out conservatives... it doesn’t seem within forum intent, if not the rules... lol

[Ripster42]

A Governement that enlists a set of people to discuss free speach?

Yes, the supreme court makes those decisions. They're the ones who decide things like yelling "FIRE!" in a theatre is not free speech (unless there's a fire). This is starting to sound more like you just want to be mad at something for no reason. IIRC, you live in the UK. Your "free speech" is much less free than ours, so spare me.

[Tuor]

Yes, the supreme court makes those decisions. They're the ones who decide things like yelling "FIRE!" in a theatre is not free speech (unless there's a fire). This is starting to sound more like you just want to be mad at something for no reason. IIRC, you live in the UK. Your "free speech" is much less free than ours, so spare me.

I am portuguese, you know, the part of Spain its not Spain...

Please give a look at Europe, most countries had fascist or comunist governement, doesn't matter which ones, but the first step is always cut on free speech. Do you think the german concentration camps were just for jews? Then go back to school to learn the truth so you can start valorising the freedom of speech. After all, the US dictated the standarts for Democracy and freedom, looks like they starting to choose the path many european countries had 80 years ago.

[Ripster42]

I am portuguese, you know, the part of Spain its not Spain...

Please give a look at Europe, most countries had fascist or comunist governement, doesn't matter which ones, but the first step is always cut on free speech. Do you think the german concentration camps were just for jews? Then go back to school to learn the truth so you can start valorising the freedom of speech. After all, the US dictated the standarts for Democracy and freedom, looks like they starting to choose the path many european countries had 80 years ago.

Thomas is 1/9 justices. The other 8 were against him. Again, the US' free speech laws are so loose we don't even have laws against hate speech, unlike portugal, where you can go to jail for a year for mocking religious worship. Ditto almost every other Euro country with their laws against free speech.

[Ivanstone]

I am portuguese, you know, the part of Spain its not Spain...

Please give a look at Europe, most countries had fascist or comunist governement, doesn't matter which ones, but the first step is always cut on free speech. Do you think the german concentration camps were just for jews? Then go back to school to learn the truth so you can start valorising the freedom of speech. After all, the US dictated the standarts for Democracy and freedom, looks like they starting to choose the path many european countries had 80 years ago.

Portugal has hate speech laws. Unlike the US.

[Tuor]

Thomas is 1/9 justices. The other 8 were against him. Again, the US' free speech laws are so loose we don't even have laws against hate speech, unlike portugal, where you can go to jail for a year for mocking religious worship. Ditto almost every other Euro country with their laws against free speech.

I always said i don't like fucking IURD, and i am still to go to jail.

Portugal has hate speech laws. Unlike the US.

Could you please citate me one? Or are you confusing laws that are meant to integrate minorities like gypsies? There is no law in Portugal that are able to limit the freedom of speech, its after all a Constitutional right.

[Ivanstone]

I always said i don't like fucking IURD, and i am still to go to jail.


Could you please citate me one? Or are you confusing laws that are meant to integrate minorities like gypsies? There is no law in Portugal that are able to limit the freedom of speech, its after all a Constitutional right.

Criminal Code (Law n°65/98 of September 2, 1998), Article 240 – Racial or religious discrimination
2) Anyone who, in a public assembly, in a writing purported to be divulged or by any means of mass communication;
a) provokes acts of violence against a person or a group of persons because of his race, colour, ethnic or national origin or religion; or
b) defames or insults a person or group of persons because of his race or ethnic or national origin or religion, specially through the negation of war crimes or of crimes against peace and humanity; intending to incite to racial or religious discrimination or to encourage it, is punishable with imprisonment from 6 months to 5 years.
Criminal Code, Article 251 – slander because of religious belief
1) Anyone who publicly offends or derides a person because of his religious belief or function, in a way adequate to breach the peace, is punishable with imprisonment up to 1 year or a fine up to 120 days.
2) The same penalty applies to anyone who desecrates a place or object of cult of religious veneration in a way adequate to breach the peace.

[Tuor]

Criminal Code (Law n°65/98 of September 2, 1998), Article 240 – Racial or religious discrimination
2) Anyone who, in a public assembly, in a writing purported to be divulged or by any means of mass communication;
a) provokes acts of violence against a person or a group of persons because of his race, colour, ethnic or national origin or religion; or
b) defames or insults a person or group of persons because of his race or ethnic or national origin or religion, specially through the negation of war crimes or of crimes against peace and humanity; intending to incite to racial or religious discrimination or to encourage it, is punishable with imprisonment from 6 months to 5 years.
Criminal Code, Article 251 – slander because of religious belief
1) Anyone who publicly offends or derides a person because of his religious belief or function, in a way adequate to breach the peace, is punishable with imprisonment up to 1 year or a fine up to 120 days.
2) The same penalty applies to anyone who desecrates a place or object of cult of religious veneration in a way adequate to breach the peace.

From the Portuguese Constitution, which is of higher legal status

https://www.parlamento.pt/Legislacao...ortuguesa.aspx

Article 37

Freedom of expression and information

1. Everyone has the right to freely express and disseminate their thoughts by word, image or any other means, as well as the right to inform, to inform themselves and to be informed, without hindrance or discrimination.

2. The exercise of these rights cannot be prevented or limited by any type or form of censorship.

3. Infractions committed in the exercise of these rights are subject to the general principles of criminal law or the illicit of mere social ordinance, and their assessment is, respectively, within the jurisdiction of the judicial courts or of an independent administrative entity, under the terms of the law.

4. All persons, whether natural or legal, are guaranteed, under conditions of equality and effectiveness, the right to reply and rectify, as well as the right to compensation for the damages suffered.

It's common sense not to be rude, but there is a diference betwin being rude and have the freedom of speech limited.

[Ripster42]

I always said i don't like fucking IURD, and i am still to go to jail.

Were you saying that with a megaphone in front of whatever IURD's (I have no idea what that is, but I'm assuming some denomination) place of worship is? Telling them they're all going to burn in hell forever for doing whatever you don't like about them loud enough that they can hear it during service? You'd be breaking the law in Portugal. That's legal in the US as long as you stay on public property, though you'd probably be fired from your job for making your company look bad (because we have freedom of association).

From the Portuguese Constitution, which is of higher legal status

3. Infractions committed in the exercise of these rights are subject to the general principles of criminal law or the illicit of mere social ordinance, and their assessment is, respectively, within the jurisdiction of the judicial courts or of an independent administrative entity, under the terms of the law

Yeah, we're given additional leeway in the US. What would otherwise be "disturbing the peace" in many cases, is legal because of the 1st amendment, unlike what's stated in Article 37.3 of your constitution, and the derivative laws written to enlarge the section's "general principles of criminal law" phrasing.

[Tuor]

Were you saying that with a megaphone in front of whatever IURD's (I have no idea what that is, but I'm assuming some denomination) place of worship is?

IURD stands for Igreja Universal do Reino de Deus, its a brasilian church that is known for controlling the peoples lifes, charging a montly fee and doing all sort of weird exorcisms.

Telling them they're all going to burn in hell forever for doing whatever you don't like about them loud enough that they can hear it during service?

i don't care if they burn in hell, my beliefs are private, i just don't like to have my life controlled.

You'd be breaking the law in Portugal.

Like me there are many other people that don't like them. Some newspapers even keep mocking on them over and over, none has been sent to court. because like me, those newspapers didn't missrespect anyone that follows the cult.

[Ripster42]

Like me there are many other people that don't like them. Some newspapers even keep mocking on them over and over, none has been sent to court. because like me, those newspapers didn't missrespect anyone that follows the cult.

They're not in jail because they're not "breaking the peace." Again, they're not standing outside the church with megaphones shouting down the preacher/pastor/father/whatever trying to give a sermon. You're allowed to do that in the US, as long as you stay on public property (otherwise it'd be trespassing). There's a group from Kansas that does this regularly at funerals for gay people (especially gay service members). They're given extra protections to do this because of our freedom of speech rulings.

[Tuor]

They're not in jail because they're not "breaking the peace." Again, they're not standing outside the church with megaphones shouting down the preacher/pastor/father/whatever trying to give a sermon. You're allowed to do that in the US, as long as you stay on public property (otherwise it'd be trespassing). There's a group from Kansas that does this regularly at funerals for gay people (especially gay service members). They're given extra protections to do this because of our freedom of speech rulings.

Yet, the US, has a commitee to discuss freedom of speech, under my Constitution, that would be ilegal.

[Ivanstone]

From the Portuguese Constitution, which is of higher legal status

https://www.parlamento.pt/Legislacao...ortuguesa.aspx

It's common sense not to be rude, but there is a diference betwin being rude and have the freedom of speech limited.

I don’t think you understand the difference. Article 240 was drafted after the constitution. If the constitution didn’t allow it, it wouldn’t exist.

Furthermore, rudeness appears to be protected speech in Portugal. Hate speech has actual limitations with legal penalties.

[Ripster42]

Yet, the US, has a commitee to discuss freedom of speech, under my Constitution, that would be ilegal.

It's literally the supreme court. It's not illegal under your constitution, you can even refer back to what you linked:

3. Infractions committed in the exercise of these rights are subject to the general principles of criminal law or the illicit of mere social ordinance, and their assessment is, respectively, within the jurisdiction of the judicial courts or of an independent administrative entity, under the terms of the law.

Note, that, in your country, it's written into your constitution that it's not even limited to the your judicial system (as it is in the US), but can also be altered by some nebulous "independent administrative entity" AKA a 'committee to discuss freedom of speech' which isn't allowed in the US constitution.

You live in a glass house and you're throwing stones at a brick one.

[Tuor]

I don’t think you understand the difference. Article 240 was drafted after the constitution. If the constitution didn’t allow it, it wouldn’t exist.

Furthermore, rudeness appears to be protected speech in Portugal. Hate speech has actual limitations with legal penalties.

I don't think you understand the diference of saying i don't like, like i said whille ago, and going rampage. Article 240 its about going rogue, or in other words, being rude.

I'll give you and example, everyone is free to say i don't like gypsies, and explaining why. What isn't allowed is saying nonsense stuff like ''they do this'' and ''do that''. same thing with religion.

I said i don't like IURD, and i explained why, i wasn't rude. Everithing i said is truth.

[Ripster42]

I don't think you understand the diference of saying i don't like, like i said whille ago, and going rampage. Article 240 its about going rogue, or in other words, being rude.

Yeah, in the US you're allowed to be 'rude' as long as you're on public property. You have more restrictions than us. You also allow more groups to restrict the bounds of freedom of speech than us. Both the judicial system of your government (the parallel group to what this thread is about) and some other administrative entity which has no parallel in the US.

[Tuor]

It's literally the supreme court. It's not illegal under your constitution, you can even refer back to what you linked:



Note, that, in your country, it's written into your constitution that it's not even limited to the your judicial system (as it is in the US), but can also be altered by some nebulous "independent administrative entity" AKA a 'committee to discuss freedom of speech' which isn't allowed in the US constitution.

Discussing the mitigation of the freedom of speech, which is the point of this thread, i can guarantee you is tottaly ilegal by any entity other then the Parliament which is the entity able to amend the Constitution.

Again, that article applies when people goes rogue.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah, in the US you're allowed to be 'rude' as long as you're on public property.

Here in Portugal that violates another constitutional right, the right of having moral integraty.

[TEHPALLYTANK]

Here in portugal that violates another constitutional right, the right of having moral integraty.

And there you have it, that is exactly the point they've been making. You have stronger laws restricting speech than the USA does. That is literally what they've been telling you.

[Ripster42]

Discussing the mitigation of the freedom of speech, which is the point of this thread, i can guarantee you is tottaly ilegal by any entity other then the Parliament which is the entity able to amend the Constitution.

Again, that article applies when people goes rogue.

Explain what going rogue means. Because as far I can tell, it's legal in the US. Would standing outside a church and using a megaphone to shout out the minister, be legal in Portugal? Or would that be breaking the peace?

I can assure you, what we're talking about in this thread, is the same thing your judicial branch does as written in 37.3, except that they involve 9 people selected by presidents and confirmed by our senate, called the Supreme Court of the United States of America, instead of the Constitutional Court of Portugal where 10 people are elected by your assembly and 3 by the justices on the Constitutional Court of Portugal. Edit: Except that, again, your constitution also allows some other administrative body to do so as was explicitly stated in the text you quoted from your constitution. Here's that text again for you, bolded part:

Infractions committed in the exercise of these rights are subject to the general principles of criminal law or the illicit of mere social ordinance, and their assessment is, respectively, within the jurisdiction of the judicial courts or of an independent administrative entity, under the terms of the law.

- - - Updated - - -

Here in Portugal that violates another constitutional right, the right of having moral integraty.

Yes. So part of your constitution itself restricts free speech, in ways the US constitution doesn't. Thanks for paying attention.