RE: Freedom of speech anyone?
March 6, 2015 at 3:43 pm
(This post was last modified: March 6, 2015 at 3:53 pm by ReptilianPeon.)
I had some respect for the organisation Cage and what they were doing. But now any respect I had is gone. Personally, I am firmly against 'freedom of speech*' if it means (religious) people who are determined to spread falsehoods/lies, such as those wanting to teach Creationism in schools or rewrite large chunks of history, and advocate hatred or violence against a particular group(s) of people are denied their right to speak. We cannot allow people who express such vile views to have their freedom of speech.
*I am confused by people who claim they are all for free speech. I think most people on this forum would agree that religious people who want to their religion to be taught in schools (Creationism in science class) or go out to proselytize on the streets are out to deliberately mislead the general public, and their own children (child abuse in my opinion, because they are denying them a good science/history education). Free speech for one person and not for another cannot be called 'freedom of speech'. I think it's right to put restrictions on people.
I know that, in some European countries, Holocaust denial is illegal so surely if you really wanted to defend freedom of speech then you'd defend the right of Holocaust deniers to speak, right? Or do people just want to defend opinions that they already agree with? 'Freedom of speech' is a very dubious term in my opinion. I think Holocaust deniers are disgusting people so I think it's right that they are denied their freedom to speak.
*I am confused by people who claim they are all for free speech. I think most people on this forum would agree that religious people who want to their religion to be taught in schools (Creationism in science class) or go out to proselytize on the streets are out to deliberately mislead the general public, and their own children (child abuse in my opinion, because they are denying them a good science/history education). Free speech for one person and not for another cannot be called 'freedom of speech'. I think it's right to put restrictions on people.
I know that, in some European countries, Holocaust denial is illegal so surely if you really wanted to defend freedom of speech then you'd defend the right of Holocaust deniers to speak, right? Or do people just want to defend opinions that they already agree with? 'Freedom of speech' is a very dubious term in my opinion. I think Holocaust deniers are disgusting people so I think it's right that they are denied their freedom to speak.