First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Post Reply No to Free Speech with Social Justice?
24681 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Aberystwyth, Wale...
Online
Posted 10/30/16

ClothStatue wrote:


The "free speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences" line is a bucket of shite.

What if I was a boss of a company, and I fired all my muslim employees and said "freedom of religion doesn't mean freedom from consequences"?


Actually that's exactly what I'm talking about. We have non-discrimination policies for religion for that very reason. Because without it you could indeed fire all your muslim employees because the freedom of religion means that the government cannot, again, arrest you for practicing a religion, that's all it means. Which is why white settlers came to the Americas in the first place (at least the british ones). We put in non-discrimination policies because we collectively agreed that that's some real bullshit. That's what we've done for ethnicity, for race, and for sex as well.


If freedom of speech doesn't mean anything more than the government not arresting you for what you say, it doesn't mean anything at all.


Actually it means everything. It means you cannot be silenced by the government. It goes hand in hand with the freedom of the press. Because as long as you can still voice your opinion you cannot be taken out of the democratic process. If you don't think that means anything, please go look at Russia under Putin and see the difference.


Ooh, what if an angry mob beat someone to death for having the wrong politics, and the court said they were all free to go because "freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences"?

By your definition, a country where that's completely routine would have free speech. I think there's a more important principle involved than that.
1027 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Somewhere Drinking
Offline
Posted 10/30/16
The man probably deserved it for his homophobic micro and macro aggression and his stance against the recent bill passed indicates his contempt towards homosexuals. So the university did the right thing and fired his ass for the sake of the school and students. His termination will serve as a warning for all professors either conform or be disposed of swiftly and promptly with no future prospects.

The job of a teacher is to make a student feel safe and at home any dangerous ideas should be filtered and disposed of and should have no place in a school environment.
3415 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M
Offline
Posted 10/30/16 , edited 10/30/16

Adjacent-Taurus wrote:The job of a teacher is to make a student feel safe and at home any dangerous ideas should be filtered and disposed of and should have no place in a school environment.
You are trolling with me right?...

1027 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Somewhere Drinking
Offline
Posted 10/30/16

GooseMcDucks wrote:


Adjacent-Taurus wrote:The job of a teacher is to make a student feel safe and at home any dangerous ideas should be filtered and disposed of and should have no place in a school environment.
You are trolling with me right?...



I hope so that guy sounds like a totally nut and so far out there.
3415 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M
Offline
Posted 10/30/16

Adjacent-Taurus wrote:
I hope so that guy sounds like a totally nut and so far out there.
if you mean the one to the left, then yes XP

22134 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / F
Offline
Posted 10/30/16 , edited 10/30/16

Ooh, what if an angry mob beat someone to death for having the wrong politics, and the court said they were all free to go because "freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences"?


Nope, the freedom of speech, again, does not keep people from beating you to death for disagreeing with you. Banning beating people to death is an entirely separate law. Arresting people who peacefully gathering is protected against by the freedom of the press (EDIT: freedom to peaceably assemble). You can stand on your soap box all day my friend, and you are completely in the right if someone attacks you or tries to silence you. But no one actually has to listen to you on your soap box, and no one has to take you seriously and anyone is free to stand up and argue you.


By your definition, a country where that's completely routine would have free speech. I think there's a more important principle involved than that.


It would, so we have other laws as well. Freedom of Speech is not the sole and final law of the land that offshoots into tinier laws, we have lots of rights that protect against many facets. The finer laws are decided democratically, as they should be. If you don't like the idea of a country where the majority disagrees with you, and by majority rules decides to go in a different direction even though you personally don't want it to go that way, I don't think you really belong in a democracy, you want everyone in their own, tiny, room-house sized little countries. That's not what the democratic process is about.

In addition, consider: by your argument, say someone calls their boss, to their face, a total piece of shit and that they think their boss belongs in the street scrounging in a dumpster, you believe that it is an infringement on their right to free speech for their boss to fire them for what they have just said. The boss can't have the person arrested, because that would be an infringement on their right to free speech, but the boss can have them removed permanently from company premises.

Also consider the fact that we have Slander and Libel lawsuits available, a further extension that the freedom of speech does not equal freedom from any consequence. Sure you can't throw someone in jail for talking shit at you, but if someone commits slander or libel against you, and you can prove with evidence that they knowingly fabricated this and it has damaged your livelihood, you can still sue their ass into oblivion.
1027 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Somewhere Drinking
Offline
Posted 10/30/16

Adjacent-Taurus wrote:


GooseMcDucks wrote:


Adjacent-Taurus wrote:The job of a teacher is to make a student feel safe and at home any dangerous ideas should be filtered and disposed of and should have no place in a school environment.
You are trolling with me right?...



I hope so that guy sounds like a totally nut and so far out there.


EXCUUUUUSE ME DUDE!!!! But how is my statement considered to be FAR OUT THERE MAN? WHAT? IT'S NOT GNARLY ENOUGH FOR YOU?

All this is done to protect the students so that they will develop into fine productive members of society and any ideology that is dangerous will inflict long lasting damage.
Minsc 
81271 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M / PEI, Canada
Offline
Posted 10/30/16

Ranwolf wrote:

While I disagree with Professor Jordon Peterson on a personal level the comment section is pure fucking Neo Nazi gold....And the sad part is I know some of them are Canadian.

Canada how the fuck do you become just as bad as the Yanks south of the border?


A) People are going out specifically to start this kind of trouble.
B) The internet.
C) All of the above.
7070 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 10/30/16
Anyone and everyone should be allowed to voice their opinion in pretty much any form. That being said, harassment, assault, etc. are completely different from the freedom of speech.

Telling someone how you feel on a subject is different from spam bombing their facebook/twitter/etc. accounts with that message. One is a potential avenue for discussion, while the other just shuts that potential down. If someone's opinion starts to directly interfere negatively with another persons life and wellbeing; they've crossed a line from just merely voicing and having an opinion.

Freedom of speech doesn't just mean that you are entitled to just your opinion; it means that others are entitled to their own opinions too.
35968 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Georgia, USA
Offline
Posted 10/30/16 , edited 10/31/16

ClothStatue wrote:


Nope, the freedom of speech, again, does not keep people from beating you to death for disagreeing with you..


That's what the 2nd Amendment is for



To protect against those from both the government and anyone else from silencing your free speech

Stand your ground FTW
5819 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/30/16
i think the fact that SJ has government funded subjects in schools for the ideology shows that their is a close connection between some people in governments and the ideology. and many of the aspects of the ideology such as being anti free speech does raise some concern about that relationship
24681 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Aberystwyth, Wale...
Online
Posted 10/30/16

ClothStatue wrote:


Ooh, what if an angry mob beat someone to death for having the wrong politics, and the court said they were all free to go because "freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences"?


Nope, the freedom of speech, again, does not keep people from beating you to death for disagreeing with you. Banning beating people to death is an entirely separate law. Arresting people who peacefully gathering is protected against by the freedom of the press (EDIT: freedom to peaceably assemble). You can stand on your soap box all day my friend, and you are completely in the right if someone attacks you or tries to silence you. But no one actually has to listen to you on your soap box, and no one has to take you seriously and anyone is free to stand up and argue you.


By your definition, a country where that's completely routine would have free speech. I think there's a more important principle involved than that.


It would, so we have other laws as well. Freedom of Speech is not the sole and final law of the land that offshoots into tinier laws, we have lots of rights that protect against many facets. The finer laws are decided democratically, as they should be. If you don't like the idea of a country where the majority disagrees with you, and by majority rules decides to go in a different direction even though you personally don't want it to go that way, I don't think you really belong in a democracy, you want everyone in their own, tiny, room-house sized little countries. That's not what the democratic process is about.

In addition, consider: by your argument, say someone calls their boss, to their face, a total piece of shit and that they think their boss belongs in the street scrounging in a dumpster, you believe that it is an infringement on their right to free speech for their boss to fire them for what they have just said. The boss can't have the person arrested, because that would be an infringement on their right to free speech, but the boss can have them removed permanently from company premises.

Also consider the fact that we have Slander and Libel lawsuits available, a further extension that the freedom of speech does not equal freedom from any consequence. Sure you can't throw someone in jail for talking shit at you, but if someone commits slander or libel against you, and you can prove with evidence that they knowingly fabricated this and it has damaged your livelihood, you can still sue their ass into oblivion.


While I'm not sure if I'd consider calling someone a piece of shit to their face something that should be protected speech, it still seems obvious that silencing that speech by threat of arrest or by threat of being fired are both equally an infringement. It seems like you're having trouble grasping the concept that there might be an underlying principle involved here. A good democracy is more than just the whims of the mob, and one's rights are more than just the privileges one is allotted by the state.
22134 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / F
Offline
Posted 10/30/16 , edited 10/30/16

While I'm not sure if I'd consider calling someone a piece of shit to their face something that should be protected speech, it still seems obvious that silencing that speech by threat of arrest or by threat of being fired are both equally an infringement. It seems like you're having trouble grasping the concept that there might be an underlying principle involved here. A good democracy is more than just the whims of the mob, and one's rights are more than just the privileges one is allotted by the state.


Underlying principles of a society are, again, what we interpret what kind of country we should be. A 'good' democracy is left up to the citizens to decide. Our constitution and other documents by the founding fathers were intended to be interpreted and thorough interpretation and our own moral consensus we create laws. You're were saying free speech and now you're saying protected speech, those are two very different implications.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/30/16

ClothStatue wrote:


While I'm not sure if I'd consider calling someone a piece of shit to their face something that should be protected speech, it still seems obvious that silencing that speech by threat of arrest or by threat of being fired are both equally an infringement. It seems like you're having trouble grasping the concept that there might be an underlying principle involved here. A good democracy is more than just the whims of the mob, and one's rights are more than just the privileges one is allotted by the state.


Underlying principles of a society are, again, what we interpret what kind of country we should be. A 'good' democracy is left up to the citizens to decide. Our constitution and other documents by the founding fathers were intended to be interpreted and thorough interpretation and our own moral consensus we create laws. You're were saying free speech and now you're saying protected speech, those are two very different implications.


Says one who's always lived with this freedom.

I don't mean to argue too much, but I feel like there is much you need to put much thought into.
22134 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / F
Offline
Posted 10/30/16

Says one who's always lived with this freedom.


As have you.


I don't mean to argue too much, but I feel like there is much you need to put much thought into.


By all means, voice your opinion. ^.^ I'm sorry if you feel that way, you're free to try and change my mind, I'm hardly married to my opinions.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.