1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Eric Posner: the US overvalued free speech

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by Carl Herrera, Sep 25, 2012.

  1. Carl Herrera

    Carl Herrera Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    45,153
    Likes Received:
    21,575
    Political/religious speech is subject to a higher level of protection, but still reasonable to,say, not permit a guy to dress up as the Prophet Mohammed standing in public space in front of a mosque taking off his pants and start masturbating.
     
  2. KingCheetah

    KingCheetah Atomic Playboy
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    59,079
    Likes Received:
    52,748
    That decision was/ is very wrong IMHO.
     
  3. Raven

    Raven Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Messages:
    14,984
    Likes Received:
    1,025
    We don't overvalue free speech. We undervalue intelligent speech.

    What worries me is that the educated class would even toy with the idea of placing further limitations on the first amendment, especially considering how many other constitutional rights we've seen eroded over the last ten years.

    And the one thing we can always predict happening after a major terrorist attack is that a few intellectuals will get horny to start snipping away at the Bill of Rights.
     
  4. gwayneco

    gwayneco Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2000
    Messages:
    3,459
    Likes Received:
    36
    So, America is exceptional when it comes to free speech. Cool. Obama should applaud that, not pooh pooh it.
     
  5. Sweet Lou 4 2

    Sweet Lou 4 2 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    39,206
    Likes Received:
    20,349
    “There’s nothing in the First Amendment that supports horrible and disgusting projects"

    Name the person who said that? No googling
     
    1 person likes this.
  6. CrazyDave

    CrazyDave Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,027
    Likes Received:
    439
    I'm going to guess Tipper Gore.

    edit: figured I was wrong but... gave it a shot.
     
  7. trueroxfan

    trueroxfan Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,170
    Likes Received:
    143
    You should read the Brethren, one of the biggest cases during the Warren years dealt with the definition of "obscene."
     
  8. Mathloom

    Mathloom Shameless Optimist

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2008
    Messages:
    21,116
    Likes Received:
    22,583
    .....
     
  9. durvasa

    durvasa Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Messages:
    38,893
    Likes Received:
    16,449
    Thanks. It hardly needs to be said that no country, including the US, is that tolerant when it comes to free speech.
     
    1 person likes this.
  10. AroundTheWorld

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2000
    Messages:
    83,288
    Likes Received:
    62,281
    No wonder that you two clowns are so unsuccessful as lawyers. Nobody said that it is absolute. Reading comprehension is essential.
     
  11. RedRedemption

    RedRedemption Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Messages:
    32,542
    Likes Received:
    7,752
    I'm a staunch advocate of free speech...
    However, what Carl Herrera mentioned earlier in this thread would be an example of freedom of speech limited in the name of public order. Much like you can't shout fire in a theater to incite panic, dressing up as Muhammad would be much the same thing. I actually see that as an inherent problem with Islam, however the blame goes both ways.
     
  12. RedRedemption

    RedRedemption Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Messages:
    32,542
    Likes Received:
    7,752
    I would be fearful to leave freedom of speech to be interpreted merely by human arbiters. Sure, we'd be preventing idiots like neo-nazis and westboro from roaming about... but flag burning and other forms of more unpopular speech could be banned as well.

    Since there is no truly objective arbiter for free speech, we have no other choice than to unshackle the limitations of it.
     
  13. Sweet Lou 4 2

    Sweet Lou 4 2 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    39,206
    Likes Received:
    20,349
    Thanks for playing. It is Rudy Giuliani.
     
  14. StupidMoniker

    StupidMoniker I lost a bet

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2001
    Messages:
    16,173
    Likes Received:
    2,826
    Blasphemy ... yes/no?

    Profane speech ... yes/no?

    Hate speech against particular racial/ethnic groups ... yes/no?

    Flag Burning ... yes/no?

    Burning public figures in effigy ... yes/no?

    Kissing or touching in a sexually-suggestive manner (straight) ... yes/no?

    Kissing or touching in a sexually-suggestive manner (non-straight) ... yes/no?

    Nudity ... yes/no?

    Masturbation ... yes/no?

    Sexual intercourse ... yes/no?

    Self-mutilation ... yes/no?

    Call for criminal activity that doesn't physically harm others (e.g. theft, vandalism) ... yes/no?

    Call for criminal activity that does physical harm to others ... yes/no?
     
  15. CrazyDave

    CrazyDave Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,027
    Likes Received:
    439
    Yeah, I looked it up immediately after guessing wrong.
     
  16. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    58,169
    Likes Received:
    48,339
    This is the biggest problem that I see with Posner's argument. Who decides what is acceptable free speech? Especially in a democracy where the government can change. He is right on the facts that free speech standards vary in different cultures and has varied greatly in the history of the US. That said just because somethings have been different in other countries or in the past I don't see as justification to do it now.

    Further while Posner criticizes calling upon Google to limit the spread of the Innocence of Muslim video as being a hypocritical way of limiting speech that puts profits over principle shows that he misunderstands how the First Amendment works. Google is a private company and as such has the right to control over its own property. The First amendment limits what the government can do about speech but doesn't limit a private entity. Its perfectly compatible with the principle of free speech that the President asks (not orders) a private entity to limit the spread of certain material and for that entity to decide whether it wants to or not.

    Free speech doesn't guarantee that private entities have to disseminate every message.
     
  17. Mathloom

    Mathloom Shameless Optimist

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2008
    Messages:
    21,116
    Likes Received:
    22,583
    The guy's argument is: either you have FREE speech or you don't. 100% of countries don't. Since there are varying degrees of restrictions of speech based on safety, religion, race, history, culture, etc. then someone IS actually drawing the line somewhere. The "person" who is drawing the line can not deny some things for free speech and accept some things for free speech unless they do it in a balanced way. He is stating that it is not being done in a balanced way.

    Primarily, I prefer free speech which restricts only speech that is willfully inducing terror - and even then, I would set a very very high threshold. So it would have to be dangerous to the people receiving the speech.

    BUT... if we're going to take it significantly further than that, which we have done to varying degrees in various countries, then Islam as a religion should not be left out. If you are restricting, you have to do it fairly, and you can't decide that "this is the restriction which sends us into the abyss" for a practice which, in principle, will lead to excessive and imbalanced implementation.

    My solution: tell Muslims nothing is protected. Tell everyone else their protection is gone. We can't have a situation where the governments of developed countries are defending free speech against Muslims, and attacking it in other similar situations.

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...l_to_insult_muslims_but_not_jews_.single.html
     
  18. AroundTheWorld

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2000
    Messages:
    83,288
    Likes Received:
    62,281
    Mathloom, you know NOTHING about free speech.

    Nothing.
     
  19. Mathloom

    Mathloom Shameless Optimist

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2008
    Messages:
    21,116
    Likes Received:
    22,583
    No, you know nothing about free speech.

    Nothing.


    >> Is this the kind of discussion you're looking for?
     

Share This Page