Free Speech & What it Means to Americans? Your Thoughts?

[Chris_Michael]

Now we all remember back when White Nationalist Richard Spencer was punched on camera, and it spread around the media. I had to look up when it happened because I forgot. The CNN story was on Jan 21st but I have HuffPost here linked to it. Anyway, that doesn't matter.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_588374a1e4b070d8cad2b1f0

This brings up a question. What is free speech? What does it mean? This isn't directed at anybody in particular. I've heard people actually condone the violent act more recently for some reason and that's what stirred up this question.

Is Hate Speech allowed under Free Speech? In your opinion?

My opinion is that you can say anything short of directly interfering with somebody else's rights. This includes threats or calling for criminal activity.

And I'll give you an example of a recent event which is brought into question Free Speech. Dave Chappelle's new special. It's "offensive." So what I did was go back to 2012 when he was in DC giving a special there. And let me tell you, I had never laughed so hard at jokes about white people. Dave said something along the lines of "If you see a group of black people with a couple of white people with them, I guarantee you those white people are the most dangerous people in the group." I nearly fell out of my chair laughing. Or when he was talking about interactions between white people and cops. Again, he had me crying laughing.

Now, Dave is no racist whereas Richard Spencer is a White Nationalist. I get that. But the same people who are punching Spencer in the face are calling Dave Chappelle's new stand-up "offensive."

So where is the line? Thoughts?

 

[phrodeau]

I agree with President Trump's position. If it benefits me and mine, I'm all for it.

 

[oggbashan]

When Literotica ran a contest on the subject of Free Speech I entered two essays:

https://www.literotica.com/s/free-speech-is-offensive

https://www.literotica.com/s/free-speech-the-acid-test

I wrote them for an international audience but some responses only assumed US Free Speech.

The first one was placed in the contest.

Edited to add: Note the dates. 12 years ago!

 

[BotanyBoy]

I think everyone has the right to never be offended and that "hate" speech should be banned because that's PROGRESS!!!

 

[Hard_Rom]

Screw politically correct. Go for polite and considerate. If you are not polite and considerate someone may just punch you in the mouth.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Screw politically correct. Go for polite and considerate. If you are not polite and considerate someone may just punch you in the mouth.

Says the guy who advocates throwing bricks at people, assault with a deadly weapon, who aren't PC.

LOL

 

[Hard_Rom]

Says the guy who advocates throwing bricks at people, assault with a deadly weapon, who aren't PC.

LOL

They're not being polite and considerate. They deserve what they get. Does the loud mouthed asshole in a bar not deserve a punch in the mouth? Does the Hitler loving KKK wannabe not deserve a brick thrown at him? Or are you one of those pacifist Quaker types?

 

[Chris_Michael]

When Literotica ran a contest on the subject of Free Speech I entered two essays:

https://www.literotica.com/s/free-speech-is-offensive

https://www.literotica.com/s/free-speech-the-acid-test

I wrote them for an international audience but some responses only assumed US Free Speech.

The first one was placed in the contest.

Edited to add: Note the dates. 12 years ago!

I will read these submissions when I wake up in the morning. I started the first one. I didn't really see anything wrong with it

Screw politically correct. Go for polite and considerate. If you are not polite and considerate someone may just punch you in the mouth.

But that's not being "politically incorrect." That's violence. Do you fight speech with violence? Because, if so, that is a major problem.

My main question is, "Does hate speech fall under the category of free speech?" And then we have to unpack what and what isn't hate speech. That is a discussion for another time.

Why am I worried about this? Well, this instance is obvious. Richard Spencer is a very extreme example, which is why I chose him. But where is the line? What kind of violence do you condone to somebody who is shouting hate speech in the street? Wouldn't you agree that you're acting as judge, jury, and executioner in any case?

Ideas that I have may be considered hate speech by people who get super offended that I refuse to use the pronouns "zie" or "zer." Would it be okay to punch me in the face over it?

Violence should never be used to shut down speech that offends you. Never.

So, let me back up for a second because I want to make this clear. Was I super upset to see Richard Spincer punched? No. Not at all. Actually, I had never heard of him before that incident. And I haven't seen him on the news since. Soooo yeah...

Battles of ideas needs to stay ideas, and the consequences of what is said will naturally happen (exceptions - threats, calling for criminal action). A great example is my opinion on feminism. It's just fucking stupid. Is that hate speech? No. Will there be consequences for me saying that? Yes, a bunch of stupid people who got upset will now hate me. But do I deserved to get punched? No. And actually, you can now use free speech to call me a misogystic, racist, homophobic, transphobic, xenophobic piece of shit who will never get laid. I'm fine with that. I have my waifus and videogames to keep me company. So take satisfaction in that.

Anyway, tanget over. The point is that people are sacrificing free speech to shut up people they don't like. And violence is the tool that is being used. That's not only illegal, but it shows that you are against what I would consider free speech.

 

[Hard_Rom]

Yes, hate speech falls under the heading of free speech. But civilized countries put limits on free speech. This site puts limits on free speech. Go ahead violate the rules on certain topic posting!

Would or did trying to talk to Adolph help? Think you can talk a NAMBL member to change his ways with talk? Or should we appease them? Live and let live?

Are you really okay with Nazis marching down your street? No itch to chuck a brick at them? Not talking shooting them down without any warning. Just get a few folk together with some bricks and bats and tell them they're not welcome. That is if the law doesn't stop them first.

 

[JawnKarTurr]

I liked classical liberals on free speech. Defend someone's right to say it, but doesn't mean you have to agree with it. Now it seems if you've been given a label it gives people the right to ban you. Only certain labels though. If you have the correct one it gives you a green light to all the offensive behavior you enjoy.

 

[BotanyBoy]

They're not being polite and considerate.

Sure it is. Just not PC.

They deserve what they get.

Because not PC.

Does the Hitler loving KKK wannabe not deserve a brick thrown at him?

Just for speaking his or her mind? No...that's called fascism.

Or are you one of those pacifist Quaker types?

No I'm the shoot the rock chucking fascists type.

 

[BotanyBoy]

But civilized countries put limits on free speech.

No, fascist do.

This site puts limits on free speech.

This site is a private service and does not wield the authority of law.

Are you really okay with Nazis marching down your street?

Yep, less destructive than Justice Democrats.

No itch to chuck a brick at them?

I'm not a fascist, so no. They have every right to make the idiots of themselves just like the feminist and Justice Democrats.

 

[Chris_Michael]

Yes, hate speech falls under the heading of free speech. But civilized countries put limits on free speech. This site puts limits on free speech. Go ahead violate the rules on certain topic posting!

Would or did trying to talk to Adolph help? Think you can talk a NAMBL member to change his ways with talk? Or should we appease them? Live and let live?

Are you really okay with Nazis marching down your street? No itch to chuck a brick at them? Not talking shooting them down without any warning. Just get a few folk together with some bricks and bats and tell them they're not welcome. That is if the law doesn't stop them first.

I am 100% fine with racists peacefully protesting just as much as I'm 100% fine with the Westboro Baptist Church for peacefully protesting. That does NOT mean I'm going to cheer them on. I'm going to sit back and think "Those are some dumb motherfuckers." Hell, I'm fine with BLM as long as they don't interfere with other people's rights (*ahem* gay pride parade) or committing criminal behavior such as rioting.

People always bring up the KKK. There are 5,000 - 8,000 KKK members. Do you really think they pose a threat to society? They have no power over anything. However, if they interfere with BLM, I would have a problem... but so would they because they'd be dead. (Edit: This is going to be misrepresented. I don't advocate for violence between the KKK and BLM but the point is that the KKK would not interfere because they'd be vastly outnumbered and the possibility of violence is high. Regardless, BLM has a right to free speech and the KKK does not have the right to interfere with BLM's rights.)

You almost have a cynical edge to the way you talk about bricks and harming people with them. How is that any different than using a firearm? Is a brick any less lethal? Does a brink have liberals Stamp of Approval as a dangerous weapon? What about a knife? Maybe? How about a rock? A sharpened rock? Slingshot? Bombs? Cars? Trucks?

As much as I hate BLM and the 3rd/4th wave feminist movement, I would never be against their freedom of speech. But that same common courtesy has to be considered with everybody, no matter how much it pains you to see or hear it. If it's peaceful, it's peaceful.

And that is the beauty of free speech. Arguments stand on their own merit rather than people using violence to silence another.

(Edit: Also, free speech does not exist on Lit, though Lit is very tolerant compared to other forums. Very tolerant. Lit is not obligated to allow free speech. It is a website, and just like any company, they can make decisions about what they allow and what they don't)

 

[Carnal_Flower]

That would be: WRONG.

United States free speech exceptions

1 Communicative impact restrictions

2 Incitement

3 False statements of fact

4 Obscenity

5 Child pornography

6 Fighting words and offensive speech

7 Speech owned by others

8 Commercial speech


More recently, a lawsuit is going forward charging that Donald Trump incited violence at his rallies in 2016. A judge recently ok'd it.

No, fascist do.

 

[Chris_Michael]

That would be: WRONG.

United States free speech exceptions

1 Communicative impact restrictions

2 Incitement

3 False statements of fact

4 Obscenity

5 Child pornography

6 Fighting words and offensive speech

7 Speech owned by others

8 Commercial speech


More recently, a lawsuit is going forward charging that Donald Trump incited violence at his rallies in 2016. A judge recently ok'd it.

You have a secret crush on Donald Trump, don't you? And specifically, what is wrong? Let's see if you can create a post with the name "Trump" in it.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

You're obsessed with this parade.

It was a parade. A coordinated event with a common purpose, with participants, not a free for all.

If you put together a backyard BBQ with the neighbors, you're going to negotiate who's bringing the wings and who's bringing the burgers and who's bringing the drinks. If you put together a magazine, the editors discuss what they want and don't want in it.

I am 100% fine with racists peacefully protesting just as much as I'm 100% fine with the Westboro Baptist Church for peacefully protesting. That does NOT mean I'm going to cheer them on. I'm going to sit back and think "Those are some dumb motherfuckers." Hell, I'm fine with BLM as long as they don't interfere with other people's rights (*ahem* gay pride parade) or committing criminal behavior such as rioting.

People always bring up the KKK. There are 5,000 - 8,000 KKK members. Do you really think they pose a threat to society? They have no power over anything. However, if they interfere with BLM, I would have a problem... but so would they because they'd be dead. (Edit: This is going to be misrepresented. I don't advocate for violence between the KKK and BLM but the point is that the KKK would not interfere because they'd be vastly outnumbered and the possibility of violence is high. Regardless, BLM has a right to free speech and the KKK does not have the right to interfere with BLM's rights.)

You almost have a cynical edge to the way you talk about bricks and harming people with them. How is that any different than using a firearm? Is a brick any less lethal? Does a brink have liberals Stamp of Approval as a dangerous weapon? What about a knife? Maybe? How about a rock? A sharpened rock? Slingshot? Bombs? Cars? Trucks?

As much as I hate BLM and the 3rd/4th wave feminist movement, I would never be against their freedom of speech. But that same common courtesy has to be considered with everybody, no matter how much it pains you to see or hear it. If it's peaceful, it's peaceful.

And that is the beauty of free speech. Arguments stand on their own merit rather than people using violence to silence another.

(Edit: Also, free speech does not exist on Lit, though Lit is very tolerant compared to other forums. Very tolerant. Lit is not obligated to allow free speech. It is a website, and just like any company, they can make decisions about what they allow and what they don't)

 

[Chris_Michael]

Also, yes I'm 100% okay with Muslims peacefully protesting. I hate religion. All religion.

Yes, all...

I'm Islamophobic and Christianiophobic.

 

[Chris_Michael]

You're obsessed with this parade.

It was a parade. A coordinated event with a common purpose, with participants, not a free for all.

If you put together a backyard BBQ with the neighbors, you're going to negotiate who's bringing the wings and who's bringing the burgers and who's bringing the drinks. If you put together a magazine, the editors discuss what they want and don't want in it.

Okay, let's assume it's protesting and nobody was assigned anything. The parade was an example. Dave Chapelle's stand up was an example. You're getting really nit picky here.

 

[phrodeau]

There are a hell of a lot more KKK members in the US than there are radical Islamists.

 

[Chris_Michael]

There are a hell of a lot more KKK members in the US than there are radical Islamists.

See? You have a right to be wrong.

jk. But seriously, that may or may not be true. Doesn't change my attitude towards the situation.

 

[needit700]

It means to me what the

Constitution saids. But to the liberal economy sucking dry dem-o-crps it means as long as you think their way!!

 

[dan_c00000]

Which group of Americans?

Here's a map to help you out.

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/americas/americas_pol96.jpg

 

[Boxlicker101]

There are a hell of a lot more KKK members in the US than there are radical Islamists.

Are you sure of that? Do you include extremist Black Muslims?

 

[Chris_Michael]

We can always rely on dan for an inflammatory response just because he has a secret crush on me for some reason.

 

[Hard_Rom]

Always hated racists and homophobes even as a kid. Didn't know any homosexuals and only had one friend of non-white ethnicity but knew a few racists and homophobes who had never met a black or gay person. Truly stupid and evil people. The world would be far better off without them.

Luckily I live in a civilized country were racists and homophobes are not allowed to march. No need to chuck a brick at them if the police are on the scene.