CDZ How Free Is Free Speech in America?

[Mac1958]

...

 

[Statistikhengst]

The uncomfortable truth is that here, as elsewhere around the world, freedom of expression has never come easily and is nearly always threatened in one way or another.

Bill Blum How Free Is Free Speech in America - Bill Blum -Truthdig

So, how do you think, is speech really free in America?

Strange question.

I've never had to pay to speak.

 

[Derideo_Te]

That's not the same as some guy saying he doesn't to, for example, bake a cake for you because (bigoted excuse here). The only reason anyone would act on that, to leverage the law, would be to punish the guy and intimidate others from trying it. They were not harmed in any way, they just saw opportunity.

Nope!

The bigot was in the wrong. If he was in the business of baking cakes then he has to bake a cake for anyone who comes in and asks for one. Public accommodation laws don't allow for discrimination.

 

[Statistikhengst]

That's not the same as some guy saying he doesn't to, for example, bake a cake for you because (bigoted excuse here). The only reason anyone would act on that, to leverage the law, would be to punish the guy and intimidate others from trying it. They were not harmed in any way, they just saw opportunity.

Nope!

The bigot was in the wrong. If he was in the business of baking cakes then he has to bake a cake for anyone who comes in and asks for one. Public accommodation laws don't allow for discrimination.

Are we back to the gay bakery thing? Oy......

 

[Mac1958]

That's not the same as some guy saying he doesn't to, for example, bake a cake for you because (bigoted excuse here). The only reason anyone would act on that, to leverage the law, would be to punish the guy and intimidate others from trying it. They were not harmed in any way, they just saw opportunity.

Nope!

The bigot was in the wrong. If he was in the business of baking cakes then he has to bake a cake for anyone who comes in and asks for one. Public accommodation laws don't allow for discrimination.

Back we go to the "public accommodation" laws again.

Funny how folks are so selective in their passion for enforcement of (certain) laws.

And, by the way, a complaint had to be filed, as I said. The couple didn't have to. They chose to.

This isn't about laws and regulations, it's about punishment and intimidation.

.

 

[BULLDOG]

Free speech is a thing of the past. And, especially since 9/11. You have to watch what you say or someone will be knocking on your door. Also, what you say on the internet is monitored by the fed. They have programs that detect certain words or phrases, which can put you on a list. No, there is no free speech.

So you think being held responsible for your statements means you can't say it in the first place? We're talking about free speech, not freedom from responsibility.

 

[BULLDOG]

I have never had my free speech rights violated. Some of the crap I read on the Internet I really have to wonder if there is any limit to free speech. So yeah, I think it is pretty free.

I also don't understand the "PC" complaint. If you are being criticized for something you said doesn't that mean you had the right to say it in the first place and those you insult have the right to respond? No matter how idiotic?

Of course they have the right to respond. Public debate and discourse is critical to a free society and may be our greatest strength.

Do you feel it's within the spirit of freedom of expression that they also leverage their freedom of expression to punish you (such as damaging or destroying your career or your business) if you say something they don't like, and/or intimidate you from expressing your opinion in the future? Is that acceptable to you?

Not to me. Debate/discourse and punishment/intimidation are two entirely different things. Those who radicalize freedom of expression to punish and intimidate are liars and cowards.

.

What you have described IS the price of freedom of speech.

Let us use a really bad analogy, because I have little else. Say you piss off one of your clients and they start going around saying that mac is a POS who molests children and anyone who invests with mac supports pedophilia? This is so distorted and far from the truth that you know no one who knows you will take it seriously. But, you happen to notice a steep drop off in investments with you. What would you do?

That's libel, slander. That's not the same as some guy saying he doesn't to, for example, bake a cake for you because (bigoted excuse here). The only reason anyone would act on that, to leverage the law, would be to punish the guy and intimidate others from trying it. They were not harmed in any way, they just saw opportunity.

Again, there is a difference between debate/discourse and punishment/intimidation.

.

They were not afforded the fair treatment that the law requires for all businesses. Even if it wouldn't matter to you, they were harmed. Isn't that the same type of thing that was decided after the Woolworths lunch counter thing?

 

[Sonny Clark]

Free speech is a thing of the past. And, especially since 9/11. You have to watch what you say or someone will be knocking on your door. Also, what you say on the internet is monitored by the fed. They have programs that detect certain words or phrases, which can put you on a list. No, there is no free speech.

So you think being held responsible for your statements means you can't say it in the first place? We're talking about free speech, not freedom from responsibility.

One can say anything they want to say. And, everyone should be held responsible for what they say. I believe in total free speech, not limited or restricted free speech.

 

[BULLDOG]

Free speech is a thing of the past. And, especially since 9/11. You have to watch what you say or someone will be knocking on your door. Also, what you say on the internet is monitored by the fed. They have programs that detect certain words or phrases, which can put you on a list. No, there is no free speech.

So you think being held responsible for your statements means you can't say it in the first place? We're talking about free speech, not freedom from responsibility.

One can say anything they want to say. And, everyone should be held responsible for what they say. I believe in total free speech, not limited or restricted free speech.

So how about an example of free speech being denied?

 

[Sonny Clark]

Free speech is a thing of the past. And, especially since 9/11. You have to watch what you say or someone will be knocking on your door. Also, what you say on the internet is monitored by the fed. They have programs that detect certain words or phrases, which can put you on a list. No, there is no free speech.

So you think being held responsible for your statements means you can't say it in the first place? We're talking about free speech, not freedom from responsibility.

One can say anything they want to say. And, everyone should be held responsible for what they say. I believe in total free speech, not limited or restricted free speech.

So how about an example of free speech being denied?

Speech is not necessarily denied. One can say anything they want to say. But, speech can be legally punished. In other words, we're free to speak, but that freedom comes with limits and restrictions. One can do what they want, but their actions carry consequences as well. It's the same with speech. It is not denied, it's limited and restricted.

 

[BULLDOG]

Free speech is a thing of the past. And, especially since 9/11. You have to watch what you say or someone will be knocking on your door. Also, what you say on the internet is monitored by the fed. They have programs that detect certain words or phrases, which can put you on a list. No, there is no free speech.

So you think being held responsible for your statements means you can't say it in the first place? We're talking about free speech, not freedom from responsibility.

One can say anything they want to say. And, everyone should be held responsible for what they say. I believe in total free speech, not limited or restricted free speech.

So how about an example of free speech being denied?

Speech is not necessarily denied. One can say anything they want to say. But, speech can be legally punished. In other words, we're free to speak, but that freedom comes with limits and restrictions. One can do what they want, but their actions carry consequences as well. It's the same with speech. It is not denied, it's limited and restricted.

If it is limited or restricted, it is done by the speaker himself, which is as it should be. If they are willing to take the natural results of their speech, they are free to say anything they want.

 

[HenryBHough]

If you're willing to keep on speaking while organized agitators try to shout you down then, yes, America has free speech. Except where those who arranged for you to speak are intimidated to cancel the event.

Prudent paid speakers get paid up front. Then if the venue weasels then it's on their dime. Try booking Slick or Hillary to speak "on the come" then get back to us.

 

[BULLDOG]

If you're willing to keep on speaking while organized agitators try to shout you down then, yes, America has free speech. Except where those who arranged for you to speak are intimidated to cancel the event.

Prudent paid speakers get paid up front. Then if the venue weasels then it's on their dime. Try booking Slick or Hillary to speak "on the come" then get back to us.

Your free speech doesn't require anybody to listen to you, or agree with what you say.

 

[Sonny Clark]

Free speech is a thing of the past. And, especially since 9/11. You have to watch what you say or someone will be knocking on your door. Also, what you say on the internet is monitored by the fed. They have programs that detect certain words or phrases, which can put you on a list. No, there is no free speech.

So you think being held responsible for your statements means you can't say it in the first place? We're talking about free speech, not freedom from responsibility.

One can say anything they want to say. And, everyone should be held responsible for what they say. I believe in total free speech, not limited or restricted free speech.

So how about an example of free speech being denied?

Speech is not necessarily denied. One can say anything they want to say. But, speech can be legally punished. In other words, we're free to speak, but that freedom comes with limits and restrictions. One can do what they want, but their actions carry consequences as well. It's the same with speech. It is not denied, it's limited and restricted.

If it is limited or restricted, it is done by the speaker himself, which is as it should be. If they are willing to take the natural results of their speech, they are free to say anything they want.

It's not limited or restricted by the individual speaking. Individuals don't punish themselves for speaking out. They don't speak and then self-impose punishment for what they said.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Back we go to the "public accommodation" laws again.

Because that is what was being violated by the bigot.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The uncomfortable truth is that here, as elsewhere around the world, freedom of expression has never come easily and is nearly always threatened in one way or another.

Bill Blum How Free Is Free Speech in America - Bill Blum -Truthdig

So, how do you think, is speech really free in America?

Disagree.

The case law clearly demonstrates that Americans enjoy greater freedom of expression today than at anytime in this Nation's history.

In the last 100 years First Amendment jurisprudence has evolved to the point where government knows what speech it may limit and what speech it may not; and as a consequence of that comprehensive jurisprudence when government does err and cross the line of appropriate regulation of speech, the people have ample recourse in the courts to invalidate such measures (see, e.g., Texas v. Johnson (1989)).

The author of the cited article succeeds in only exhibiting his ignorance of the law and a lack of understanding of the First Amendment cases he notes; moreover, First Amendment jurisprudence must be perceived in context and as a whose to have an accurate understanding of that jurisprudence.

Last, the notion that whistle-blowers are being 'persecuted' or prisoners 'silenced' is ignorant, ridiculous, and unfounded; and to reference the surveillance programs seeks only to contrive and propagate a red herring fallacy.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Some people really think free speech means that one should be able to say anything to anybody and not expect a reaction.

Weird.

 

[Freewill]

Free speech is a thing of the past. And, especially since 9/11. You have to watch what you say or someone will be knocking on your door. Also, what you say on the internet is monitored by the fed. They have programs that detect certain words or phrases, which can put you on a list. No, there is no free speech.

You shouldn't have said that.

 

[Freewill]

I have never had my free speech rights violated. Some of the crap I read on the Internet I really have to wonder if there is any limit to free speech. So yeah, I think it is pretty free.

I also don't understand the "PC" complaint. If you are being criticized for something you said doesn't that mean you had the right to say it in the first place and those you insult have the right to respond? No matter how idiotic?

Of course they have the right to respond. Public debate and discourse is critical to a free society and may be our greatest strength.

Do you feel it's within the spirit of freedom of expression that they also leverage their freedom of expression to punish you (such as damaging or destroying your career or your business) if you say something they don't like, and/or intimidate you from expressing your opinion in the future? Is that acceptable to you?

Not to me. Debate/discourse and punishment/intimidation are two entirely different things. Those who radicalize freedom of expression to punish and intimidate are liars and cowards.

.

What you have described IS the price of freedom of speech.

Let us use a really bad analogy, because I have little else. Say you piss off one of your clients and they start going around saying that mac is a POS who molests children and anyone who invests with mac supports pedophilia? This is so distorted and far from the truth that you know no one who knows you will take it seriously. But, you happen to notice a steep drop off in investments with you. What would you do?

That's libel, slander. That's not the same as some guy saying he doesn't to, for example, bake a cake for you because (bigoted excuse here). The only reason anyone would act on that, to leverage the law, would be to punish the guy and intimidate others from trying it. They were not harmed in any way, they just saw opportunity.

Again, there is a difference between debate/discourse and punishment/intimidation.

.

the bake shop has little to do with freedom of speech, it has a lot to do with freedom of religion, you are connecting the two.

But, as you point out, speech is limited by libel and slander laws.

the truth is you can say just about anything you want about the government and there is nothing they are going to do. We see it everyday on this board. But if you wish to lie about a person, libel or slander, that gets you into trouble real fast.

 

[BULLDOG]

So you think being held responsible for your statements means you can't say it in the first place? We're talking about free speech, not freedom from responsibility.

One can say anything they want to say. And, everyone should be held responsible for what they say. I believe in total free speech, not limited or restricted free speech.

So how about an example of free speech being denied?

Speech is not necessarily denied. One can say anything they want to say. But, speech can be legally punished. In other words, we're free to speak, but that freedom comes with limits and restrictions. One can do what they want, but their actions carry consequences as well. It's the same with speech. It is not denied, it's limited and restricted.

If it is limited or restricted, it is done by the speaker himself, which is as it should be. If they are willing to take the natural results of their speech, they are free to say anything they want.

It's not limited or restricted by the individual speaking. Individuals don't punish themselves for speaking out. They don't speak and then self-impose punishment for what they said.

A little thick there aren't you? It has nothing to do with punishment. It's more a matter of a choice of whether what you want to say is worth any potential blowback you might deserve for saying it. Jeez I can hear the stupid coming through the computer.