| Free speech v hate speech... 08:10 - Jun 21 with 6708 views | bluelagos |
On the whole I support free speech and don't like it when people are cancelled etc.
But clearly there has to be a point where we criminalise words.
So my question to the board, which side of the line does this sit? Clearly it's based on ignorance/prejudice, even hatred. Am sure it will be investigated, but should it be prosecuted?
|  |
| |  |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:10 - Jun 21 with 1484 views | bluelagos |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 15:39 - Jun 21 by J2BLUE |
Do you walk or take the car? |
You after a lift J2?
 | |
| |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:35 - Jun 21 with 1452 views | blueasfook |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 11:53 - Jun 21 by J2BLUE |
I don't understand how people don't watch videos like that before uploading them and think wow this is cringe, I don't think I will bother uploading it. |
Just like 99% of Tik Tok vids |  |
| |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:39 - Jun 21 with 1430 views | J2BLUE |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:10 - Jun 21 by bluelagos |
You after a lift J2?
|
That equipment doesn't carry itself. |  |
| |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:44 - Jun 21 with 1422 views | phillymark |
I truly believe that all speech should be free from prosecution unless it directly attempts to physically harm a person or group
This doesn’t mean it should be free from any consequences - you could be fired, banned from places, ostracized etc.
But you shouldn’t be arrested |  | | |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:46 - Jun 21 with 1407 views | phillymark |
This falls firmly on the side of “he’s a moron”. But being a moron isn’t illegal | | | |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:46 - Jun 21 with 1407 views | NthQldITFC |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:39 - Jun 21 by J2BLUE |
That equipment doesn't carry itself. |
Woof woof! |  |
| |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:46 - Jun 21 with 1406 views | NthQldITFC |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 15:39 - Jun 21 by J2BLUE |
Do you walk or take the car? |
Depends how tired I am. | |
| |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:50 - Jun 21 with 1389 views | Herbivore |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:46 - Jun 21 by phillymark |
This falls firmly on the side of “he’s a moron”. But being a moron isn’t illegal |
However, hate speech is illegal. And this likely constitutes hate speech or another form of hate crime. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:52 - Jun 21 with 1377 views | thatbdude |
Suprised he hasn't burnt himself yet knowing how stupid he is |  |
| |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:55 - Jun 21 with 1359 views | giant_stow |
thats one of the more pitiful things I've seen. |  |
| |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 18:31 - Jun 21 with 1286 views | factual_blue |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:55 - Jun 21 by giant_stow |
thats one of the more pitiful things I've seen. |
That's saying something from somebody who watches norwich. |  |
| |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 19:24 - Jun 21 with 1246 views | Blueschev |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:50 - Jun 21 by Herbivore |
However, hate speech is illegal. And this likely constitutes hate speech or another form of hate crime. |
The very notion of "hate speech" being a crime makes me very uncomfortable. It's an enormous amount of power to put in the hands of people who will happily abuse it to silence those whose views they dislike. This is in no way an endorsement of the moron in the op, if that really needs to be stated. |  | | |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 19:26 - Jun 21 with 1244 views | matt92 |
How about not platforming nazis? Just a thought. | | | |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 19:43 - Jun 21 with 1213 views | giant_stow |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 18:31 - Jun 21 by factual_blue |
That's saying something from somebody who watches norwich. |
brute. | |
| |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 19:43 - Jun 21 with 1213 views | Mullet |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 16:52 - Jun 21 by thatbdude |
Suprised he hasn't burnt himself yet knowing how stupid he is |
EU directives innit. Means the flags are fire retardant. |  |
| |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 19:53 - Jun 21 with 1200 views | Herbivore |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 19:24 - Jun 21 by Blueschev |
The very notion of "hate speech" being a crime makes me very uncomfortable. It's an enormous amount of power to put in the hands of people who will happily abuse it to silence those whose views they dislike. This is in no way an endorsement of the moron in the op, if that really needs to be stated. |
I think speech that incites hatred against minoritised groups who have faced and continue to face oppression and violence should be illegal. I get your worries about how it can be used, but the law as it currently stands doesn't easily allow for simply silencing people the government dislikes. For something to be a hate crime it has to be directed towards a particular minoritised group and I don't have an issue with that. | |
| |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 21:24 - Jun 21 with 1122 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 13:30 - Jun 21 by ElderGrizzly |
This will just give him more airtime on GB News in the name of "free speech" than he already has.
As others will no doubt point out, free speech doesn't mean you can say what you want without consequences.
It's a hate crime and he should be punished in that light. |
As you allude to, though, there is a danger that such action would serve his purposes. Those who support his position would see it as over-zealous censorship.
What would the likely impact of a prosecution? A fine that is inconsequential to someone of his wealth?
I would say, let him burn the emblem and let the discussion run. However, I can see an argument that this could be seen as dangerously inciting hatred. Should that be proven, the sentence should be far more than a small fine. |  |
| |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 05:38 - Jun 22 with 1028 views | BlueBadger |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 09:46 - Jun 21 by chicoazul |
You’re giving him exactly what he wants. |
Ignoring bullies and bigots when they're picking on people who just want to get on with their lives always makes them stop. |  |
| |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 05:38 - Jun 22 with 1030 views | BlueBadger |
That's how he spent his Father's Day.
If Billie would just let him see the kids all this could have been avoided. [Post edited 22 Jun 2023 5:39]
| |
| |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 08:16 - Jun 22 with 971 views | DJR |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 09:23 - Jun 21 by DJR |
To be honest, he is merely someone at perhaps the more controversial end of policies promoted by organisations like the Heritage Foundation, at which Liz Truss spoke a couple of months ago.
https://www.mediamatters.org/heritage-foundation/anti-lgbtq-group-heritage-found
More worryingly for me is that the type of the culture wars policies he supports are now fairly mainstream in the Tory Party, on GB News and in the right wing press.
Bur as a supporter of free speech, I am not sure what can really be done about this, now that the genie is out of the bottle (especially given the vast number of despicable comments on social media more generally), apart from the left standing up more strongly for progressive policies (as is happening in the US but not in the UK).
As it is, I think he comes across as fairly manic, so may do more harm to the cause than good. But this is not the case with the more "respectable" media supporting such policies. [Post edited 21 Jun 2023 9:27]
|
Further proof of the mainstreaming of anti-progressive views.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jun/22/tory-mps-contributing-to-growin
In the current climate, I doubt there would be any appetite (even by Labour) to abolish section 28, were it still the law, let alone proceed with civil partnerships, gay marriage, gay adoption and gender recognition, were they not already the law. [Post edited 22 Jun 2023 8:19]
|  | | |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 08:24 - Jun 22 with 939 views | Herbivore |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 08:16 - Jun 22 by DJR |
Further proof of the mainstreaming of anti-progressive views.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jun/22/tory-mps-contributing-to-growin
In the current climate, I doubt there would be any appetite (even by Labour) to abolish section 28, were it still the law, let alone proceed with civil partnerships, gay marriage, gay adoption and gender recognition, were they not already the law. [Post edited 22 Jun 2023 8:19]
|
Really depressing stuff. Just as UKIP and the right of the Tory party have used Brexit and migration to normalise racist rhetoric, the Tories are now stoking the flames of anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment for their own ends. They would happily see the country tear itself to pieces over confected culture wars if it meant they could avoid being humiliated at the next GE. They couldn't care less about anyone other than themselves and their backers. | |
| |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 08:41 - Jun 22 with 912 views | Churchman |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 12:51 - Jun 21 by leitrimblue |
It's just so backwards. I doubt there is a person on this forum who's not descended from immigrants who arrived here on boats. |
Nah, my lot flew in. The first lot with the 5th century Saxons, Angles and Jutes using Ye Olde NotsoEasyjet and the even nastier ones with the Normans using ConquerorAir.
Non of this vomiting in the bilges for my lot! |  | | |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 08:51 - Jun 22 with 901 views | DJR |
The starting point for any debate on free speech and its limits are the principles espoused by John Stuart Mill in his pamphlet On Liberty. His was one of the first, and perhaps the most famous, liberal defences of free speech.
He set out various principles on free speech, the fourth of which below is known as the harm principle.
"If the arguments of the present chapter are of any validity, there ought to exist the fullest liberty of professing and discussing, as a matter of ethical conviction, any doctrine, however immoral it may be considered."
"If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
We should have “absolute freedom of opinion and sentiment on all subjects, practical or speculative, scientific, moral or theological."
"... the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others."
I don't think what Fox has done would amount to causing harm according to Mill's harm principle because it requires an action to directly and in the first instance invade the rights of a person. Having said that, countries such as the UK may have in place laws that do penalise what he has done.
The following article (and in particular paragraphs 2.1, 2.3 and 2.4) contain an interesting discussion of Mill's principles, and especially the link between the harm principle and hate speech.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freedom-speech/ [Post edited 22 Jun 2023 8:56]
| | | |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 09:13 - Jun 22 with 876 views | Blueschev |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 19:53 - Jun 21 by Herbivore |
I think speech that incites hatred against minoritised groups who have faced and continue to face oppression and violence should be illegal. I get your worries about how it can be used, but the law as it currently stands doesn't easily allow for simply silencing people the government dislikes. For something to be a hate crime it has to be directed towards a particular minoritised group and I don't have an issue with that. |
I would argue that the current law does just that. Look at how the current government are trying to impose limits on free speech and discussion in education, it's all politically motivated and dangerous. | | | |
| Free speech v hate speech... on 09:18 - Jun 22 with 861 views | DJR |
The anti-trans debate appears to be morphing into cloud cuckoo land territory.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1783209/Headteacher-warns-of-kids-identifying-
Let's hope Laurence Fox doesn't find out or he'll be burning pictures of animals.
EDIT: The worrying thing is that the anti-woke and anti-BLM Katharine Birbalsing was until recently the Social Mobility Commissioner, just as non-progressives are being appointed to head organisations such as the Equalities and Human Rights Commission. [Post edited 22 Jun 2023 9:27]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
