First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Post Reply Does the freedom of speech have limits?
42489 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / New Jersey, USA
Offline
Posted 7/19/15
Let me know if a thread like this one exist or not.
Thanks a bunches.

Explain your opinion in great detail.

Bonus Question:

1) Do you think everyone should be able to speak freely?
13149 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 7/19/15
There are obviously criminal uses of speech such as threats and reckless endangerment which are not protected under "free speech", however all opinions should be able to be expressed and yes, everyone should be able to speak freely (assuming their speech isn't criminal)
11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 7/19/15
Freedom of speech has no limits.

However, freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence. Any one of us could go around saying whatever the hell we want, but depending on what it is and how it's directed will decide whether or not we are punished by law.

You can simply look at the law to see what is and isn't protected.
42489 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / New Jersey, USA
Offline
Posted 7/19/15

dotsforlife wrote:

Freedom of speech has no limits.

However, freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence. Any one of us could go around saying whatever the hell we want, but depending on what it is and how it's directed will decide whether or not we are punished by law.

You can simply look at the law to see what is and isn't protected.


Why is that the case?
11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 7/19/15

qualeshia3 wrote:


dotsforlife wrote:

Freedom of speech has no limits.

However, freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence. Any one of us could go around saying whatever the hell we want, but depending on what it is and how it's directed will decide whether or not we are punished by law.

You can simply look at the law to see what is and isn't protected.


Why is that the case?


Now that's a question for our lawmakers
54843 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / SoCal
Offline
Posted 7/19/15
The limit is whatever doesn't get deleted by moderators.
1344 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M
Offline
Posted 7/19/15
Free speech is one of the most poorly understood aspects of the American Bill of Rights, both by enforcers and people who expect to be protected by it. One thing that free speech does not do, never did, and was never intended to do is protect people from any entity other than the government. We've all seen stories where someone says something stupid, get fired from the private company their work for, and try to invoke free speech to defend themselves. Companies reserve the right to dismiss their employees for a number of offenses that employees agree to when hired, up to and including humiliating the company in some manner.

On the other hand, the government is constantly considering certain elements of free speech not worth protecting in the name of safety and security, one of the most contested tradeoffs in politics.

As one of my high school history teachers used to say, "freedom is not free." What we consider freedom today exists within (and because of) a number of legal restrictions, both clearly defined and not so much.
Posted 7/19/15
the term freedom of speech should be limited.

a lot of people often use that to be offensive and think they shouldn't deserve a consequence for it.
6936 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Portland, OR
Offline
Posted 7/19/15
People should be allowed free speech until they prove they do not deserve it anymore
42489 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / New Jersey, USA
Offline
Posted 7/19/15

dotsforlife wrote:


qualeshia3 wrote:


dotsforlife wrote:

Freedom of speech has no limits.

However, freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence. Any one of us could go around saying whatever the hell we want, but depending on what it is and how it's directed will decide whether or not we are punished by law.

You can simply look at the law to see what is and isn't protected.


Why is that the case?


Now that's a question for our lawmakers


Oh, I see.
16598 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / NC
Offline
Posted 7/19/15 , edited 7/19/15
No limits... Period... Just as the 2nd Amendment should be...
14783 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Online
Posted 7/19/15 , edited 7/19/15

dotsforlife wrote:

Freedom of speech has no limits.

However, freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence. Any one of us could go around saying whatever the hell we want, but depending on what it is and how it's directed will decide whether or not we are punished by law.

You can simply look at the law to see what is and isn't protected.


Also, a Supreme Court decision historically ruled that it DOES have limits--
When the Smothers Brothers sued CBS saying the network cancelled their show early because of too much anti-Vietnam preaching, the SC ruled in favor of the network, saying that the 1st Amendment only exists between the government and the owner of the speech.

So, the White House legally can't send someone down to order Fox News to stop doing so many anti-Obama stories, but an editor at the NY Times can fire one of their own reporters for writing an unacceptable story.
In individual terms, you can stand on a soapbox in the public park and make a speech, and cops can't arrest you (unless you're drunk), but if you do it in a store or at a protest in some corporate building, security does have the right to throw you out, as it's their building.

This fact is often ignored by shock comics/DJ's, who claim they're "Championing First Amendment Rights", when, in fact, they can be tossed out on their ear by the guy in charge, like everybody else.
55111 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / West
Offline
Posted 7/19/15
27254 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 7/19/15 , edited 7/19/15
There is no such thing as complete freedom of anything, and this is how it should be. Complete freedom means allowing people to use those freedoms to interfere with the rights of others. I think people should be able to do or say anything without fearing punishment unless their actions interfere with others' ability to exist or with the rights of others.

Other factors to consider: How reasonable and/or necessary is the speech? What is the burden on others? What is the intent of the speaker? What harm results from allowing the speech? How do we punish lawbreakers and how much will it cost?

As mentioned in another post above, freedom of speech as set forth in the Constitution is intended to be used against the government, not your neighbor. You are free to criticize the government without fear of punishment, but there's a line here, too. You're not allowed to make bomb threats or spread lies to destroy the reputations of individual people, for instance.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.