Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

What's wrong with hate-speech?

Page 3 of 4 [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

25 May 2021, 3:03 am

funeralxempire wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
track - suit :lol:


Are you're sure you're not on the spectrum? At least infrared? :P


Well there was a time you know...



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,541
Location: Right over your left shoulder

25 May 2021, 3:13 am

cyberdad wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
track - suit :lol:


Are you're sure you're not on the spectrum? At least infrared? :P


Well there was a time you know...


Yeah, my dad only ever got called ret*d but let's face it, the criteria and jargon change but the traits remain.


_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
Just a reminder: under international law, an occupying power has no right of self-defense, and those who are occupied have the right and duty to liberate themselves by any means possible.


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

25 May 2021, 3:20 am

Well....my daughter's genes aren't from mum... :wink:



Mr Reynholm
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,363
Location: Tulsa, OK

25 May 2021, 8:04 am

cyberdad wrote:
Mr Reynholm wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Mr Reynholm wrote:
Hate speech laws are un-American. It is about silencing those whose speech the government disagrees with.


Yes I am sure you would just love unfiltered opinions about autism and disability spreading through the airwaves because that's what we want. For everybody to just air their prejudices.

Who decides what is "Hate Speech"?


Old white men in suits

Please be reasonable.
Hate speech laws are a form of censorship
Censorship, no matter how well meaning will ultimately be used to silence dissent by those in power



Mr Reynholm
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,363
Location: Tulsa, OK

25 May 2021, 9:26 am

Free speech is an important component of a free society. What I'm reading from other posters is that they want "Hate Speech" laws to restrict speech that is offensive to them in some way. This is more of an issue of civility and culture. You can't pass laws that require people to like or be nice to anyone. Government is downstream of culture. I think that the best approach is to try to change the culture rather than pass un-inforceable laws. Culture can be changed and does change.



Red Raid
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 25 Dec 2020
Age: 21
Gender: Male
Posts: 47
Location: North Carolina, United States

25 May 2021, 10:58 am

You're already going down a wormhole if you censor any speech. I want to hear all speech, I don't need a trillion dollar corporation thinking for me.



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,541
Location: Right over your left shoulder

25 May 2021, 11:11 am

Yeah man. Bans on yelling fire in crowded theatres are censorship too.


_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
Just a reminder: under international law, an occupying power has no right of self-defense, and those who are occupied have the right and duty to liberate themselves by any means possible.


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
Location: Melbourne, Australia

25 May 2021, 11:30 am

funeralxempire wrote:
Yeah man. Bans on yelling fire in crowded theatres are censorship too.


And, strangely enough, it isn't illegal either...

Quote:
Ninety-three years ago, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote what is perhaps the most well-known -- yet misquoted and misused -- phrase in Supreme Court history: "The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic."

Quote:
But those who quote Holmes might want to actually read the case where the phrase originated before using it as their main defense. If they did, they'd realize it was never binding law, and the underlying case, U.S. v. Schenck, is not only one of the most odious free speech decisions in the Court's history, but was overturned over 40 years ago.

Quote:
Today, despite the "crowded theater" quote's legal irrelevance, advocates of censorship have not stopped trotting it out as thefinal word on the lawful limits of the First Amendment. As Rottman wrote, for this reason, it's "worse than useless in defining the boundaries of constitutional speech. When used metaphorically, it can be deployed against any unpopular speech." Worse, its advocates are tacitly endorsing one of the broadest censorship decisions ever brought down by the Court. It is quite simply, as Ken White calls it, "the most famous and pervasive lazy cheat in American dialogue about free speech."

Source: https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-time-to-stop-using-the-fire-in-a-crowded-theater-quote/264449/



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

25 May 2021, 4:41 pm

Mr Reynholm wrote:
This is more of an issue of civility and culture. You can't pass laws that require people to like or be nice to anyone. Government is downstream of culture. I think that the best approach is to try to change the culture rather than pass un-inforceable laws. Culture can be changed and does change.


I'm afraid with the internet and social media there is actually a greater urgency to curtail hate-speech. The scenario you propose also makes it legal for groups of bullies to surround a person with autism and verbally say things intended to trigger that person without repercussion.

Bullying in school and the workplace is a big issue associated with suicide and mental breakdown and opening the doors to discriminatory language (on the basis of free speech) will exacerbate existing social problems.

Also how do you propose to change culture when human beings actively avoid people they dislike?



Mr Reynholm
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,363
Location: Tulsa, OK

25 May 2021, 5:49 pm

cyberdad wrote:
Mr Reynholm wrote:
This is more of an issue of civility and culture. You can't pass laws that require people to like or be nice to anyone. Government is downstream of culture. I think that the best approach is to try to change the culture rather than pass un-inforceable laws. Culture can be changed and does change.


I'm afraid with the internet and social media there is actually a greater urgency to curtail hate-speech. The scenario you propose also makes it legal for groups of bullies to surround a person with autism and verbally say things intended to trigger that person without repercussion.

Bullying in school and the workplace is a big issue associated with suicide and mental breakdown and opening the doors to discriminatory language (on the basis of free speech) will exacerbate existing social problems.

Also how do you propose to change culture when human beings actively avoid people they dislike?

You keep implying that I'm somehow pro-bullying of autistic persons which is absurd as I on the spectrum. I would thank you to cease.
We may be talking about two different things.
Bullying is abuse and is unacceptable behavior to most of us. If you are suggesting that somehow any difference of opinion or viewpoint aired in a public forum constitutes bullying I would have to disagree. Free speech in a free society is the ability for persons to discuss whatever they please. That doesn't mean one will agree with everyone. That also doesn't mean that persons with a different point of view are inherently evil. The world would be a boring place if everyone were just alike.
The problem with trying to police free speech with Hate Speech laws is this; Who decides what is "Hate Speech"?
What happens when YOUR opinions become hate speech?
Unintended Consequences of giving the government Too Much Power.
This is one of those governmental powers that can come back to bite everyone's arse.



The_Znof
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 1,133
Location: Vancouver Canada

25 May 2021, 5:57 pm

I hate social media :jester:


fify-

Mr Reynholm wrote:
. Government [should be] downstream of culture.




https://i.pinimg.com/originals/e8/16/ca ... 20a743.jpgImage



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

25 May 2021, 10:40 pm

Mr Reynholm wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Mr Reynholm wrote:
This is more of an issue of civility and culture. You can't pass laws that require people to like or be nice to anyone. Government is downstream of culture. I think that the best approach is to try to change the culture rather than pass un-inforceable laws. Culture can be changed and does change.


I'm afraid with the internet and social media there is actually a greater urgency to curtail hate-speech. The scenario you propose also makes it legal for groups of bullies to surround a person with autism and verbally say things intended to trigger that person without repercussion.

Bullying in school and the workplace is a big issue associated with suicide and mental breakdown and opening the doors to discriminatory language (on the basis of free speech) will exacerbate existing social problems.

Also how do you propose to change culture when human beings actively avoid people they dislike?

You keep implying that I'm somehow pro-bullying of autistic persons which is absurd as I on the spectrum. I would thank you to cease.
We may be talking about two different things.
Bullying is abuse and is unacceptable behavior to most of us. If you are suggesting that somehow any difference of opinion or viewpoint aired in a public forum constitutes bullying I would have to disagree. Free speech in a free society is the ability for persons to discuss whatever they please. That doesn't mean one will agree with everyone. That also doesn't mean that persons with a different point of view are inherently evil. The world would be a boring place if everyone were just alike.
The problem with trying to police free speech with Hate Speech laws is this; Who decides what is "Hate Speech"?
What happens when YOUR opinions become hate speech?
Unintended Consequences of giving the government Too Much Power.
This is one of those governmental powers that can come back to bite everyone's arse.


Ok so you are talking about expressing personal opinion. But even then there has to be boundaries, For example how long do you think some random dude would last on social media if he posted how much he thinks it should be legal to screw children? He would be cancelled faster than you can say "cancel culture", And there;s plenty more e,g, black people should be sent back to Africa to reduce the crime problem would end up with cancellation and losing your job. I could go on.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

25 May 2021, 10:41 pm

The_Znof wrote:
I hate social media :jester:


fify-
Mr Reynholm wrote:
. Government [should be] downstream of culture.




https://i.pinimg.com/originals/e8/16/ca ... 20a743.jpgImage


Our minds are molded by old white men in suits (again)



Mr Reynholm
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,363
Location: Tulsa, OK

26 May 2021, 8:33 am

cyberdad wrote:
Mr Reynholm wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Mr Reynholm wrote:
This is more of an issue of civility and culture. You can't pass laws that require people to like or be nice to anyone. Government is downstream of culture. I think that the best approach is to try to change the culture rather than pass un-inforceable laws. Culture can be changed and does change.


I'm afraid with the internet and social media there is actually a greater urgency to curtail hate-speech. The scenario you propose also makes it legal for groups of bullies to surround a person with autism and verbally say things intended to trigger that person without repercussion.

Bullying in school and the workplace is a big issue associated with suicide and mental breakdown and opening the doors to discriminatory language (on the basis of free speech) will exacerbate existing social problems.

Also how do you propose to change culture when human beings actively avoid people they dislike?

You keep implying that I'm somehow pro-bullying of autistic persons which is absurd as I on the spectrum. I would thank you to cease.
We may be talking about two different things.
Bullying is abuse and is unacceptable behavior to most of us. If you are suggesting that somehow any difference of opinion or viewpoint aired in a public forum constitutes bullying I would have to disagree. Free speech in a free society is the ability for persons to discuss whatever they please. That doesn't mean one will agree with everyone. That also doesn't mean that persons with a different point of view are inherently evil. The world would be a boring place if everyone were just alike.
The problem with trying to police free speech with Hate Speech laws is this; Who decides what is "Hate Speech"?
What happens when YOUR opinions become hate speech?
Unintended Consequences of giving the government Too Much Power.
This is one of those governmental powers that can come back to bite everyone's arse.


Ok so you are talking about expressing personal opinion. But even then there has to be boundaries, For example how long do you think some random dude would last on social media if he posted how much he thinks it should be legal to screw children? He would be cancelled faster than you can say "cancel culture", And there;s plenty more e,g, black people should be sent back to Africa to reduce the crime problem would end up with cancellation and losing your job. I could go on.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant. This is where the concept of the "Marketplace of Ideas" comes in. Those who advocate for things that are unseemly or offensive to society will probably be shunned by society. The problem is that the government should make no laws about what topics are off limits. The Bernays quote above illustrates the point. If you control speech ultimately you control thought. I may not agree with everyone's opinion but that is part of living in a free society.



Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
Location: Melbourne, Australia

26 May 2021, 9:33 am

cyberdad wrote:
Our minds are molded by old white men in suits (again)


In order to satisfy the needs of those who choose to focus on (and judge) a message, not based upon it's content, but rather on the superficial characteristics such as their race or skin colour of the person who delivered it (I'm sure there's a word to describe those who do this, I just can't quite remember what it is...), perhaps this will be more "acceptable" to them:

Image



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,939
Location:      

26 May 2021, 9:36 am

It is interesting to note that many of those who defend "hate speech" as "free speech" are also the same people who supported Mr. Trump and defended his lies in the past ... and who are now curiously silent on those topics.