Does freedom of speech still exist?

[Mooshi]

I'm honestly not so sure anymore. Seems to be going in the way of the dinosaur. Rules and regulations are important because they keep things in check. Even this site falls into that. WS and Kada-Ru wanted Furtopia to be a certain way and it's their right to run it how they choose. However, there are some entities that are crossing that line and are more or less dictators and are cowards.

There are things I don't agree with and think the world would be alot better without such filth (like the KKK), but it is their right to say what they want, no matter how stupid. Not ever act of free speech is even a message of hate. Sites that leak real news are important because otherwise we're being force feed cherry-picked "facts" about what is going on that may or may not be entirely accurate.

One thing you may or may not know about me is that I'm strongly anti censorship. I believe in truth as opposed to this drivle we have to deal with. Censorship and stifling free speech (depending on which country you're from, it may be one of the first rights such as the firs amendment of the US) is everywhere it shouldn't be.

It doesn't take the brightest person to figure out government has a nasty habit of covering things up from the general public. Sometimes it's a bunch of extremist nomads from a 3rd world nation that threatens freedom of speech. Seriously, why they hell are we such cowards over drawings these days anyway? Ugh..

Doesn't have to be extremist, sometimes the religious are horrible at censoring reality. Take the Mormon owned web host Bluehost. Their terms are dodgy at best as what is "obscene". Personal moral convictions are one thing, but if you're a business that deals with the internet and based in the US, you should not ignore the first amendment because you don't agree with something someone elses says! A man had his site taken down because some of his comments on his blog had the "f word" (honestly, adults use such speak all the time, it's not a big deal) Site itself wasn't violent, no adult content, just a word. If the site were run by someone else like here, then there is a legit case for that language not allowed. But it was the mans own website and it was just a word!

Makes me sick that even the internet is becoming this hugbox of censorship. Very few web hosts believe in free speech. A majority do not and gave up all integrity in my eyes.

Anyone else feel strongly about freedom of speech or lack there of?

[Avan]

*walks into a crowded building*
FIRE!
*causes mass panic, and people get trampled*

There /are/ limits as to how stupid you can get with whatever you say. Just wanted to point that out.

---

Thing is that we need more freedom of intellectual speech, and less freedom of speaking like idiots IMO. As in, being idiots being saying things that are just bound to cause someone harm directly or fairly directly. I can list a few.

[Alsek]

*walks into a crowded building*
FIRE!
*causes mass panic, and people get trampled*

There /are/ limits as to how stupid you can get with whatever you say. Just wanted to point that out.

I've heard this argument before,  and it's always irritated me because it's obviously far from being the point of the argument.

And therein lies the problem.  Such things as common sense need to be used by a judge and a jury.  It is obvious to anyone looking at this situation that someone caused an unnecessary problem.  He wasn't rallying people to impeach a politician,  he wasn't speaking out on human rights,  he wasn't sharing an urgent and important idea with the general public.  He was trying to cause trouble.

People yelling fire in large building can be arrested for trespassing on private property,  disturbance of the peace,  and if anyone is killed involuntary manslaughter.  Get creative.

There are ways of getting things done.   There's a story in which a man would break into a convince store every day at the same time and steal a pack of cigarettes.  This became almost retinue.  But when the man was finally caught,  they could not charge him for anything apart from petty theft because on no individual robbery did he take anything more valuable than $300.  Some lawyer got the brilliant idea to charge him on several separate counts of arson for the cigarettes he was burning.



But instead of looking at what really needs to happen,  people abandon common sense and look only at the letter of the law with no regard for the spirit or idea of the law.


I believe in the power of free speech.  I believe it is important for keeping our government in check,  i believe that it is what keeps the highest levels of authority in our country accountable to the people they represent,  and i believe that it is what solves serious issues such as human rights violations.

But the problem isn't our loss of rights.  The loss of rights is just a symptom of our loss of common sense.  Return common sense,  remove the overuse of political correctness,  and we wont even have to struggle to keep our rights.  No one will try to take them because no one will be ignorant enough to try.

But no law can be put into place to return common sense.  No law can be made to give people a thicker skin and prevent them from being offended at the drop of a hat.

 

[Mooshi]

I do believe part of it has to do with wanting to save your own bacon. It's nothing new whenever someone of high authority is part of a scandal. They will try everything in their power to prevent their screwups from becomming public. I for one support these brave journalist and leak sites that bring corruption to the surface!

[Avan]

Well, in an ideal world, complete freedom of speech would be totally ok, because everyone would be rational & intelligent.
But in a world filled with gullible idiots, words are by far mightier than any sword, or nuclear weapon. With the right words in the right situation, one could destroy the world (even if it was not their intention).

[Alsek]

Well, in an ideal world, complete freedom of speech would be totally ok, because everyone would be rational & intelligent.
But in a world filled with gullible idiots, words are by far mightier than any sword, or nuclear weapon. With the right words in the right situation, one could destroy the world (even if it was not their intention).

If humanity desires to destroy itself someday,  i suppose it's whiten their right to do so...

But people like myself believe that freedom of speech encourages thought and that people as a whole would be more intelligent if they shared their opinions,  were allowed to openly argue their opinions without fear of censorship,  and were able to agree as a whole what to do without interference.

In a world were everyone caters to stupidity,  every sharp corner is padded,  and people are censored in order to prevent them from hurting eachother's feelings,  there is no reason to develop intellectually.  (If you make it idiot proof,  they'll make a better idiot.)

[Avan]

How about mandatory epistemology classes?

[Avan]

If humanity desires to destroy itself someday,  i suppose it's whiten their right to do so...

If it somehow everyone did desire that, yes, but so long as /I/ am alive, it would not be within their right, as I would be adversely impacted against my will. (Don't know about everyone else; can't speak for them)

[Alsek]

How about mandatory epistemology classes?

Well apart from violating human rights by forcing people to attend a class which could vary well be considered indoctrination...

You're attacking a symptom rather than a cause.  You can cram all the knowledge you want into someone's head.  It won't make them wise.

Knowledge is the acquisition of facts.
Wisdom is how you process the knowledge you acquire.

    Ignorance is to knowledge
as stupidity is to wisdom.


Our school systems teach only knowledge.  They don't teach wisdom because wisdom isn't something you can sit down and have an informational class about.  You acquire it through failure and experience.

For the things we have to learn before we can do them, we learn by doing them.

However in our society everything is so safeguarded that people can not fail and don't ever have to learn.

People with wisdom seek knowledge on their own.  If you can fix the wisdom problem,  you will fix the overwhelming amount of ignorance as well.


For this reason, trying to combat stupidity by throwing knowledge at people and safeguarding them from eachother's opinions is like giving ibuprofen to a cancer patient with a brain tumor because his head hurts.  It doesn't solve the larger issue and honestly doesn't help the symptom all that well either.

[Avan]

How about mandatory epistemology classes?

Well apart from violating human rights by forcing people to attend a class which could vary well be considered indoctrination...

Actually, the very point of the class is the opposite of indoctrination. And sure, it's attacking a symptom, but it's not like you can cure the cause.

[Alsek]

How about mandatory epistemology classes?

Well apart from violating human rights by forcing people to attend a class which could vary well be considered indoctrination...

Actually, the very point of the class is the opposite of indoctrination. And sure, it's attacking a symptom, but it's not like you can cure the cause.

Of course you can.

Let people fail occasionally.  Trial and error is the only thing that will help someone to grow wise.  If they experience neither trial nor error,  or experience error but no one tells them that they're wrong,  there's no reason to think.  If people don't have to think for any reason,  they wont.  Humans are lazy by nature. The more someone thinks,  the better at doing it they become.

[Avan]

That's not a cure. Not everybody is going to think.

[For those who don't know, epistemology classes are designed to get people to question why they believe what they believe; basically it gets people to realize that they can think critically about things, and not simply passively absorb information. Which is... the exact opposite of indoctorination, which relies specifically on /not/ questioning what you are learning.]

[Kobuk]

Getting people to SPEAK is easy. Getting them to THINK is harder.

[Avan]

Getting EVERYBODY to think is impossible.

[Mooshi]

I think we're drifting off just a wee bit.

There will always be sensable people and ignorant people. No amount of classes will change that. Even on the most basic level of education, you will have one kid who tries to excell and another who will shoot spitwads at the blackboard..

This isn't about getting people to think per say, this is about stifling someone's right to what is law in their country and ignoring it. Forcing censorship on someone when they aren't doing anything unlawfully is illegal. It doesn't matter if what they are saying makes sense or has any sense of morality or not. Illegal is illegal. That is the issue.

As furries, "Yiff in hell furfag" gets tossed around. Some laugh and others get geniunely insulted by it. No matter how stupid or offensive, that is free speech and not breaking the law. Calling all Germans Nazis is going even further and something that is just asking for a backlash. Still, it is protected under free speech.

When someone is all negative like this, the correct thing to do is let things run there course, not shut it down because you don't like what is being said. What I mean by that is if someone is saying harsh things, they will be losing respect in the process by those who can think properly. Think of it as a tanking tv show that loses ratings each week. Eventually it'll get dropped due to lack of interests. Look at the KKK today vs its peak in the past. Alot of rallies are laughable now how little the numbers are. This is because the sensable people had enough and had better things to do and walk off.

So yeah, let people say whatever even if its negative. They'll only ruin themselves in the end anyway. If someone came here to bash furries and post nothing but proaganda, that is their right...right up until an admin excercises their own right and boots them out for being a pest.

People should be allowed to speak and not be cut off before they got a chance to. Does this mean anti furry hater is having their own rights violated by being banned? Not exactly. They were breaking the rules which are the essentially the law here and thus is not allowed. On the lawbooks in the real world, there is no "You must never question any government body or corperation. You are not allowed to make complaints and make them public. You are not allowed to tell the truth and must comply to what we tell you and automatically accept them for fact." In the USA, it's a complete 180. Its in our constitution that we have the right to call out shanigans and that our speech is free! What's the point of saying the constitution means anything special anymore if you're just going to violate it in every way?

[Avan]

There will always be sensable people and ignorant people. No amount of classes will change that. Even on the most basic level of education, you will have one kid who tries to excell and another who will shoot spitwads at the blackboard..

Unfortunately, that's true.

[Yip]

Doesn't have to be extremist, sometimes the religious are horrible at censoring reality. Take the Mormon owned web host Bluehost. Their terms are dodgy at best as what is "obscene". Personal moral convictions are one thing, but if you're a business that deals with the internet and based in the US, you should not ignore the first amendment because you don't agree with something someone elses says! A man had his site taken down because some of his comments on his blog had the "f word" (honestly, adults use such speak all the time, it's not a big deal) Site itself wasn't violent, no adult content, just a word. If the site were run by someone else like here, then there is a legit case for that language not allowed. But it was the mans own website and it was just a word!

Makes me sick that even the internet is becoming this hugbox of censorship. Very few web hosts believe in free speech. A majority do not and gave up all integrity in my eyes.

Let me start by saying that I am a very strong supporter of freedom of speech. Even if it's the most vile and hate filled speech you could imagine, it must still be allowed because for freedom of speech to have any value, it's the speech that is the most unpopular that needs the most protection.

That said, what you are referring to here is a tricky issue because while the government does not have the right to engage in censorship, the citizens do. For example, a TV station has the right to choose what they will and will not show on their network. What you are suggesting is that the hosting service has no right to dictate what content they will host.  If the host isn't allowed to restrict the content, then they should be completely free from any responsibility of said content, even if the content is illegal. I could be wrong, but I don't think that's the case.

But even if the host were not held legally responsible, they should still be allowed some control over the content. For example, Furtopia isn't just a forum, they also do free web hosting. But their are requirements such as the majority of the content must be furry, and you are not allowed to use it as a file share site, and things like that. When you get down to it, those restrictions ARE a form of censorship, but they are perfectly reasonable and I wouldn't dream of disallowing web hosts like Furtopia from having such restrictions.

[Mooshi]

Obviously some content is illegal no matter what country you're from. While there are things here and there depending on which government is calling the shots, child porn and beastiality will always be illegal and for a good reason.

I could argue that the web host bluehost had a misleading terms of service that was pandering to their own agenda and violating the constitution. Since the CEO got themselves politically involved with Mormon candidates and the TOS mentioned nothing of a site being deleted for swearing. In other words, it was false representation.

Furtopia had it clear that it is a website for furries/fans of furries and that its hosting was for furry material. Pretty straight forward. Deleting a mans entire site because of the "f word" left by commentors on his blog in the comment section is going way too far.

Tv has censorship for a reason because some channels are devoted to a certain rating and target audience. In a way, the arguement may be valid, but only to a certain fault. The last frontier we have for free speech is the Internet and the worlds governments are trying their hardest to police that. Just take a look at countries like China. Do you want the world to be like that? I don't think you do and neither do I.

[Yip]

What content is and isn't illegal is not the point I was making. My point is simply that if a web host is not allowed to place restrictions on the content they host, then it's foolish to punish them in any way if the content is illegal. As to what content is and isn't illegal, that also gets into grey area with regards to free speech. I, at least in some ways, disagree with you that child porn and beastiality should always be illegal. So long as there is no direct harm being done, and there isn't when you are talking about art, then it shouldn't be illegal. Photos are a little trickier since harm could have been done in their production. But outlawing drawings, whatever they might be depicting, is in my mind a violation of free speech.

I could argue that the web host bluehost had a misleading terms of service that was pandering to their own agenda and violating the constitution. Since the CEO got themselves politically involved with Mormon candidates and the TOS mentioned nothing of a site being deleted for swearing. In other words, it was false representation.

So it's not really a free speech issue, but one which should be handled by contract law.

[Mooshi]

The bluehost issue is just one of many. I brought it up to prove how rediculious some anti free speechers are to take down an entire site due to the f bomb. There are way more offending sites out there that are still up that say more than a cheeky 4 letter swear.

Typing "Jew" brings up a "hate site" as the 2nd result. I know people get offended, but I don't see why people actually think online petitions accomplish anything. Maybe in some cases, but mostly they are a waste of time. Many people can't seem to grasp the concept of free speech it seems and would censor the world if they had power. (Thankfully these people do not. )

Am not going to have an arguement over the legality of things such as child porn, but I do agree on drawings. Bush was never that bright, but things such as the PROTECT ACT were flat out stupid beyond words. It's one thing to want to protect abused children. That itself is an admirable thing to do. But to give drawings "rights"...did W forget to take his special medication when he thought of that blunder? Not talking copyrights, I mean HUMAN rights. A drawing is a drawing and not a living being. A man got arrested for importing lolicon from Japan. It doesn't matter if you like it or not, they are NOT real children.

www.japanator.com/man-arrested-for-manga-collection-the-comic-book-legal-defense-fund-will-take-the-case--8753.phtml

Hate type speech will always get a knee-jerk reaction from some interest group, but not all of free speech is about trying to justify hating something without the law on your butt. Sometimes it can be a whistle blower that is calling out corruption. Instead of upholding the first amendment (or whatever your countries equivlant is), the same people who sworn to protect can also be the source of controversy.

Say you have undeniable proof that a federal judge is taking bribery money and you uploaded this onto the internet to expose it. If your web host or ISP are cowards, they will bend over if said judge orders your site to be pulled down. And like the cowards they are, alot will comply. Very few groups still have the courage to say no and uphold free speech.

[Kobuk]

If you're going to debate/discuss freedom of speech in regards to child porn and/or beastiality, then please take it to the Adult Discussion forums, as those two types of topics are only to be discussed there. Thanks.

[Serra Belvoule]

There's a huge difference between liberty and licentiousness   
And I mean it in a non-sexual way, btw, just to make clear.
Liberty is taking decisions in a responsible way and not being "repressed", being aware of what response will the statements make.
An example of that might be a controversial statement that will lead for a heated but civil debate.
Licentiousness is, and I quote, "Lacking restraint, or ignoring societal standards, particularly in sexual conduct; Disregard for accepted rules".  Disregarding the sexual side to that, you are basically putting an idea out there without any forethought or concern for what it may cause. As such, it could create an aggression towards social interaction. You all know examples of that.