Is Freedom of Speech Ethical?

[cultsmasher]

Or in my case, freedom to speak the TRUTH!  I have been banned from every forum out there for speaking the truth.  (Except this one)  Are those who speak the truth unethical?  Or is it those who suppress such truth.  Next, one of the main problems is that you can't speak the truth without it offending somebody.  If what I say offends somebody, and I show that they deserve to be offended, am I being unethical?  Next, I will show you what some people had to say about Freedom of Speech.  Were their statements unethical?

  1.

  2.

  3.

[cultsmasher]

Yes, I have more.

[abaris]

I have been banned from every forum out there for speaking the truth.

´

Yes, I know, you have been banned numerous times. So, what is your "truth"? In your own words, if you please, not as in quoting others.

[julep]

I can't wait. 

Q, Nazi, Russbot? Place your bets now!

[cultsmasher]

I have been banned from every forum out there for speaking the truth.

´

Yes, I know, you have been banned numerous times. So, what is your "truth"? In your own words, if you please, not as in quoting others.

  I will be getting around to that.  Also, you say that you know I have been banned many times.  Have you ran across me at other forums?  If so, can you say which ones they were?

[abaris]

I can't wait. 

Q, Nazi, Russbot? Place your bets now!

No, just some bloke, who thinks he's in possession of the one and only universal truth. By his own admission and as far as memory serves, banned almost everywhere he cropped up.

And obviously failing to make a distinction between the public space and a private forum. Free speech doesn't apply in a private space, a mistake he made almost everywhere. Be a dick and you get the boot. That's all there is to know.

I will be getting around to that. Also, you say that you know I have been banned many times. Have you ran across me at other forums? If so, can you say which ones they were?

So get around to it now. Your quotes are kinda ridiculous as in see my whole post.

And yes, we met on several forums. No pleasant memories, that's for sure.

[julep]

I can't wait. 

Q, Nazi, Russbot? Place your bets now!

No, just some bloke, who thinks he's in possession of the one and only universal truth. By his own admission and as far as memory serves, banned almost everywhere he cropped up.

And obviously failing to make a distinction between the public space and a private forum. Free speech doesn't apply in a private space, a mistake he made almost everywhere. Be a dick and you get the boot. That's all there is to know.

Awww...kind of sad. Okay, new bets: how long will it take for the mods to ban this particular manifestation? 

Imma going to say: four days from now, April 10.

[cultsmasher]

I can't wait. 

Q, Nazi, Russbot? Place your bets now!

No, just some bloke, who thinks he's in possession of the one and only universal truth. By his own admission and as far as memory serves, banned almost everywhere he cropped up.

And obviously failing to make a distinction between the public space and a private forum. Free speech doesn't apply in a private space, a mistake he made almost everywhere. Be a dick and you get the boot. That's all there is to know.

 I will be getting around to that.  Also, you say that you know I have been banned many times.  Have you ran across me at other forums?  If so, can you say which ones they were?

So get around to it now. Your quotes are kinda ridiculous as in see my whole post.

And yes, we met on several forums. No pleasant memories, that's for sure.

  Don't tell me what to do.  I'll get around to it when I get around to it.  You also say that at those other forums we didn't get along.  Well that must mean you are a shithead.  Because I have posted many things on many forums.  I was also ready willing and able to defend anything I said.  With that being the case, the forums banned me instead.  Not a very ethical way to win a debate.  And oh how the cockroaches would scurry out from under the woodwork and have their say.  Knowing that I'm not around to defend myself.  And leaving whatever bullshit they had to say as the last word in whatever thread.  The filthy worms.

[cultsmasher]

I can't wait. 

Q, Nazi, Russbot? Place your bets now!

No, just some bloke, who thinks he's in possession of the one and only universal truth. By his own admission and as far as memory serves, banned almost everywhere he cropped up.

And obviously failing to make a distinction between the public space and a private forum. Free speech doesn't apply in a private space, a mistake he made almost everywhere. Be a dick and you get the boot. That's all there is to know.

Awww...kind of sad. Okay, new bets: how long will it take for the mods to ban this particular manifestation? 

Imma going to say: four days from now, April 10.

  It will probably happen after I begin to logically wipe my ass with you over anything I might say that you disagree with.

[Dancefortwo]

[Thumpalumpacus]

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Freedoms come with responsibilities. You can't yell "FIRE!" in crowded theater or "AMBULANCE!" in a crowded law firm.

[Thingymebob]

Freedoms come with responsibilities. You can't yell "FIRE!" in crowded theater or "AMBULANCE!" in a crowded law firm.

Or "Hi Jack" to a pilot called Jack on a crowded plane.

[Minimalist]

Freedom of speech is vital in a democracy but it does not imply a duty to listen to nonsense, either.

[SYZ]

Freedom of speech here in Australia has always been of prime importance, both
in the press, in broadcast news, and in the public sphere.

However, I'm beginning to doubt that lately, as ■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■ has
of late said that ■■■■■■■ and ■■ ■■■■■■■■ have been pressing the
government to ■■■■ ■■■■■■■■ or ■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■ web
forums, and ■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■ when using Facebook, TikTok, or Twitter.  
However, ■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■ has denied this.  He said that the government
would never consider ■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■ any public platform, but it would
name ■■ ■■■■■■■ as having falsely proposed ■■■■■■ ■■■■■■ as being
the ■■■■■ ■■■■■■■.  When contacted by ■■■■■■, he responded simply that
■■■■ ■■■■■ was ■■■■ ■■■■■■ ■■ ■■ and ■■■■■■ a ■■■■  
tomorrow, when the 2022 ■■■■■■■■ ■■■ will be tabled.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Freedom of speech is vital in a democracy but it does not imply a duty to listen to nonsense, either.

Nor does it imply freedom from consequences or pushback. You're free to spout racist or political BS. I'm free to speak out against your BS, and maybe organize a boycott of your business, and so on.

[Minimalist]

Of course but what an awful lot of people cannot seem to grasp is that Freedom of Speech is a constitutional right which prevents the government from charging you criminally for anything you say.

It does not apply to non-governmental entities.

What kind of asshole can't grasp that?

[Dānu]

Of course but what an awful lot of people cannot seem to grasp is that Freedom of Speech is a constitutional right which prevents the government from charging you criminally for anything you say.

It does not apply to non-governmental entities.

What kind of asshole can't grasp that?

The same assholes who think that their crap should be subsidized because mah freedom is an absolute.

[Cavebear]

Of course but what an awful lot of people cannot seem to grasp is that Freedom of Speech is a constitutional right which prevents the government from charging you criminally for anything you say.

It does not apply to non-governmental entities.

What kind of asshole can't grasp that?

Well, I can't, in the way you put it.  There are many things you can't say.  I can start with shouting "fire" in a crowded building.  But it goes further than that.  

Slander and libel are better, more legal, examples.  Libel and slander are both punishable.  Libel is written; slander is printed.  And while distinct, they are crimes that "freedom of speech" will not protect you from, if challenged.

Libel is defamation in print of a false statement.  You have a right to an opinion, but not a false public statement.

Slander is a false spoken statement that harms an individual.  

So basically, you can call someone stupid or annoying orally or in writing, but you can't say or write something provably untrue.

Every "right" has a limitation. Such statements are subject to civil penalties.

[Dancefortwo]

Freedom of speech here in Australia has always been of prime importance, both
in the press, in broadcast news, and in the public sphere.

However, I'm beginning to doubt that lately, as ■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■ has
of late said that ■■■■■■■ and ■■ ■■■■■■■■ have been pressing the
government to ■■■■ ■■■■■■■■ or ■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■ web
forums, and ■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■ when using Facebook, TikTok, or Twitter.  
However, ■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■ has denied this.  He said that the government
would never consider ■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■ any public platform, but it would
name ■■ ■■■■■■■ as having falsely proposed ■■■■■■ ■■■■■■ as being
the ■■■■■ ■■■■■■■.  When contacted by ■■■■■■, he responded simply that
■■■■ ■■■■■ was ■■■■ ■■■■■■ ■■ ■■ and ■■■■■■ a ■■■■  
tomorrow, when the 2022 ■■■■■■■■ ■■■ will be tabled.

Makes sense to me.  I totally agree with you.

[SaxonX]

The intention of freedom of speech was to prevent the government from silencing its critics. Not so bigots on Twitter could use it as a shield against their critics.

[Minimalist]

Slander and libel are better, more legal, examples.  Libel and slander are both punishable.

But not criminally.  As Thump noted, freedom of speech entail risks and consequences.  If you libel or slander someone you can get sued in civil court.

[Thingymebob]

We all have freedom of speech, what happens to you after that depends upon where you live.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Of course but what an awful lot of people cannot seem to grasp is that Freedom of Speech is a constitutional right which prevents the government from charging you criminally for anything you say.

It does not apply to non-governmental entities.

What kind of asshole can't grasp that?

An entitled snowflake?

[Thumpalumpacus]

The intention of freedom of speech was to prevent the government from silencing its critics. Not so bigots on Twitter could use it as a shield against their critics.

No one on Twitter or any other social-media platform has freedom of speech. They are bound by the terms and conditions they agreed to on entering the membership and as such have already accepted that their speech is limited.

Bigots can't use a free-speech defense against private organizations shutting them down. If I own a printing press, that doesn't mean that any man-jack can come down the pike and demand to use my private property to disseminate ideas that I find odious.