Freedom of Speech

[ShadowKatt]

PETAs UNHappy Meal
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.131467

Gay Marrige Protests
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.132884?page=4#2980472

Okay, so I'm browsing the forums tonight and I came across both of these threads. One is by the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA, the other is from an (essentially) hate group calls God Hates Fags. For those of you who don't live in the US, or just don't care, go ahead and tune out now, but for the rest of us, I have to ask: Exactly how far does the Freedom of Speech extend? I used to believe that your rights ended where anothers began, that you were free to do what you pleased until it infringed upon another rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but I'm starting to think that this isn't the case. I don't want to sound naive, because I know that the world as we know it is a shallow, vain, and hateful place, but I always believed that in america, we had certain inalienable rights. So I pose to you, just how far does our Right to Free Speech, as well as all the other first amendmant rights, stretch? What is acceptable and unacceptable in todays times, and should the federal government actually be cracking down on people like these for infringement on others rights?

 

[newguy77]

They're not infringing on their rights, they're just speaking out against them. I don't think PeTA has bombed a McDonald's yet (wouldn't put it past them), but the people being spoken out against are allowed to carry on as they please, so none of their rights are being infringed upon.

 

[grimsprice]

I agree with the posts above. Say whatever you want, i don't care. However, don't expect someone to believe the stupidity you're spouting off.

 

[Ibanez887]

I think that the freedom of speech is becoming way too stretched out, especially on the basis of what is publicly right and wrong.
PETA is taking way too much advantage of freedom of speech and they have to stop before they really start pissing off countries and corporations

 

[Destal]

It becomes unacceptable once it begins to harm other people. The PETA people, while entirely insane, have a right to voice their opinion. I'm not sure about the gay marriage people, they are probably pushing the limit due to the fact that they are harassing minors, plus they are effing creepy. So in short the right to free speech extends until it is harmful to another person. Publishing an article in a newspaper about someone you don't like and making a bias against them is not allowed, celebrities get slightly different treatment there, cost of being famous.

 

[Destal]

PETAs UNHappy Meal
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.131467

Gay Marrige Protests
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.132884?page=4#2980472

Okay, so I'm browsing the forums tonight and I came across both of these threads. One is by the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA, the other is from an (essentially) hate group calls God Hates Fags. For those of you who don't live in the US, or just don't care, go ahead and tune out now, but for the rest of us, I have to ask: Exactly how far does the Freedom of Speech extend? I used to believe that your rights ended where anothers began, that you were free to do what you pleased until it infringed upon another rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but I'm starting to think that this isn't the case. I don't want to sound naive, because I know that the world as we know it is a shallow, vain, and hateful place, but I always believed that in america, we had certain inalienable rights. So I pose to you, just how far does our Right to Free Speech, as well as all the other first amendmant rights, stretch? What is acceptable and unacceptable in todays times, and should the federal government actually be cracking down on people like these for infringement on others rights?

You can say WHATEVER you want, words can never take away another's rights, actions are a different story.

That isn't true if you read how the law is written, most people just assume that it is that way. Defamation of another person publicly is illegal without evidence.

And by the law being written I mean how the Supreme Court has ruled on First Amendment cases. They set the precedence for laws.

 

[QuirkyTambourine]

I used to believe that your rights ended where anothers began, that you were free to do what you pleased until it infringed upon another rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,

You're essentially right with that statement, in my mind. As long as speech doesn't infringe on another's constitutional rights, it should be considered within the bounds of the law. However, hate groups such as the God Hates Fags (or the WBC in general) group, say that they fall under the law when, in my mind, they shouldn't. I'm a big fan of freedom of speech, but I can not reconcile those statements in any shade of grey that falls between what is hate speech and what is expression.

These people obviously feel very strongly this way, but their feelings are ignorant and based off of...stereotypes(?) that simply aren't true. They're as bad as the segregationists of post Civil War America up until the 60's. The KKK is able to have rallies because their message falls under the heading of free speech, even though they deliberately try to outcast a group of people and in the process, rob them of those constitutional rights that we're all granted as citizens.

So basically, I can't decide whether they cross the line with free speech or not, I want to say yes because their protest is so ridiculous they shouldn't be allowed to pollute the thought pool of America ([sub]not sure if that term makes sense but whatever[/sub]) but on the other hand, I fear that if we start quieting the ridiculous protests with laws, what's to stop them from quieting the unpopular protests with laws, and then eventually any protest at all.

 

[Amnestic]

I'm pretty sure that this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words_doctrine] will come in handy for the flame war to come. I'll just drop it here as a little bit of sanity before the storm really riles itself up.

 

[Destal]

I'm pretty sure that this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words_doctrine] will come in handy for the flame war to come. I'll just drop it here as a little bit of sanity before the storm really riles itself up.

That is one of the examples I was referring to above.

 

[Kpt._Rob]

The PETA people don't bother me, the hate group does, and the reason is this. PETA, no matter what they are saying, will not incite people to the level of violence where they are going to end up killing or hurting anyone. The hate group on the other hand, is completely another story. People ALREADY ARE getting killed by fringe groups like this here in the U.S., innocent boys like Matt Shepard for instance. This hate group is enciting the type of anger that lead Matt Shepard to get killed, and it could easily encite that type of anger again. The difference here, is that PETA is protesting, the hate group is doing something more akin to shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre, because what they're saying really could end up killing a kid. And even those it doesn't kill, it can do untold amounts of psychological damage.

 

[DarkBlood626]

To censor even the most bullshit neo-Nazi bullshit is to promote censorship of any sort then anything can be censored especially the Truth.

 

[72Chevy]

Voltaire said it best, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." No limit's to free speech.

 

[Twilight_guy]

According to the first amendment, you can say or write anything you want. If you want go to the town center and expose profanity continuously and then follow it up with racial slurs, you can. You might get arrest for disturbing the peace, but the first amendment makes it valid for you to say anything. What you cant do, is physically hurt someone. PETA and gay protest group can say or write anything they want. Some people may not like seeing it, but you can't infringe on first amendment rights just because you don't like it. If you could tell someone "hey stop saying that, PETA" then whats to stop someone from taking away something else because it offends them? If you take one bit of speak away, then any bit of speech can be the next target.

 

[Robert632]

well, peta is always being a douche to someone, but there fake ads are ussually fun to look at for a while(i.e they seem to think mcdonalds is saten, instead of just his spawn.) but that god hates fags group can go drop of a ciff, as doesn't god not hate people?

 

[daxter101]

Im all for freedom of speech, and if you dont like what someone says, there is a reason for the mute button on the TV, and if its in the paper then STOP READING, all these whiny little bitches that sue people because they "hurt their feelings" need to harden up.

and to whoever that model is that sued google or whoever it was, i say, awww the mean person called you fat, does poor didums want a cookie.

 

[Typhusoid]

Freedom of speech is paramount. As long as your not taking an action actively detrimental the the position your opposing you should be allowed to espouse your opinion

 

[Kollega]

Voltaire said it best, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." No limit's to free speech.

This. Freedom of speech is fundamental right. Of course,hate spewing should be frowned upon (Neo-Nazis and fundamentalists are really pushing it),but if we start actually censoring hate,then it's a good start for a brutal authoritarian dictatorship - next they can censor political protests,then art...

 

[grimsprice]

The PETA people don't bother me, the hate group does, and the reason is this. PETA, no matter what they are saying, will not incite people to the level of violence where they are going to end up killing or hurting anyone.

PETA privately funds ecoterrorists that bomb medical labs working on the cure for aids. Just so you know.

 

[Woem]

The PETA people don't bother me, the hate group does, and the reason is this. PETA, no matter what they are saying, will not incite people to the level of violence where they are going to end up killing or hurting anyone.

PETA privately funds ecoterrorists that bomb medical labs working on the cure for aids. Just so you know.

Could you provide an actual valid source for this statement?

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

I think that the freedom of speech is becoming way too stretched out, especially on the basis of what is publicly right and wrong.
PETA is taking way too much advantage of freedom of speech and they have to stop before they really start pissing off countries and corporations

I usually don't like PETA, but I do sorta like the idea of the Unhappy Meal.

Also, I have to disagree with you about the countries and corporations. I hate corporations and don't look a lot more favoribly on countries.