HomeCrewCalendarFAQSearchRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 "Freedom of Speech" and attempting to understand it!

Go down 

Freedom of speech
All of us have it, you idiot!
0%
 0% [ 0 ]
Some of us have it, you idiot!
0%
 0% [ 0 ]
None of us have it, you idiot!
50%
 50% [ 2 ]
Idiot!
50%
 50% [ 2 ]
Total Votes : 4
 

AuthorMessage
Xs
Spammer Noob - Level 0
Spammer Noob - Level 0
avatar

Title : Irrelevant
Attribute : *Affected by Stun Attack by Warmir*
Reputation : 462
Number of posts : 5264
Location : Pakistan
[9D](Acclaim) : Xss
[JD] : XsDenied
[FW] : XsDenied
Me? : What I've felt, what I've known, turn the pages, turn to stone...

PostSubject: "Freedom of Speech" and attempting to understand it!   Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:31 am

Question.
Why doesn't humanity have freedom of speech or do you think it does?

Question in more than one sentence.
The purpose of this topic is simple. The following few paragraphs are an attempt to elaborate on the purpose and the rather limited understanding I have due to which I am posing these questions.

The are many perspectives by which we have been given freedom of speech. I say given because most of us never had to struggle to achieve this "freedom". However, at the same time, there are many methodologies by which the very same freedom is repressed. Is freedom of speech so elusive that over 3000 years since Moses introduced the concepts, that over 2000 years since Jesus introduced the concepts, that over 1000 years since Muhammad introduced the concepts we have not been able to achieve this very freedom?

I only bring the names of these 3 highly respected personalities because between their followers there is a definitive majority in the world. Monotheists, unlike history, can not blame polytheism for the repression of freedom of speech. What then is the cause for freedom of speech to still be questioned?

The purpose of this topic is not theological debate regarding which religion brings freedom and which one doesn't. The purpose is to understand that after so many thousands of years of evolution why is the birth right of every species revoked from our own, by our own? Survival of the fittest has shown us one thing, species which are vocal, survive. Often more than other species. e.g. the rabbit doesn't make much of a sound in order to communicate, however it thumps its feet in order to alert the rest of its group of a threat. Dogs, cats, lions, even rattlesnakes, all use sound in order to communicate, so using the ability of our slightly more evolved speech is not unnatural. It doesn't go against theological roots either. So then what is the problem?

Maybe my perspective is flawed, which is why I'm asking this question. I agree with you in that assessment. So lets examine the data. Even in "democratic" and "developed" countries social networks of potential employees are scanned to ensure they haven't said things against the hiring company. In the same countries, the online activity of existing employees is monitored to ensure they don't say anything which looks bad for the company, even it is said as a point of view. In some of these "developed" and "open minded" countries it is considered illegal to even do peaceful protests, which could question any action the government has taken. Does this mean that the people have the right to choose and once they have chosen the person who has been "elected" is immune from all legal prosecution, save a military coup or revolt by the populous? What then of nations where the population is not legally allowed to own weaponry which is comparable to the "law enforcers"? a revolt in such nations would be virtually impossible. Those nations are developed and democratic. The rationale for not allowing the populous comparable weaponry is comprehensible; even agreeable, so what distinction is there between the Kings that existed in 1000 (AD), the "Presidents" that existed in 1900 (AD) and the CEOs that exist in 2000 (AD)? At what point does this "democracy" turn into a mixture of despotism and plutocracy?

So my perspective might not be flawed. Then what is the reason that Earth still does not have Freedom of speech?

NOTE

  • Theological debate is NOT the intent.
  • This topic does NOT intend to harass or subject any particular country or form of government.
  • If you wish, kindly post and I'll cite examples (with references) of the above claims regarding the "freedom of speech" being highly questionable.

_________________
Martin Niemoller wrote:
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out--because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out--because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak out for me.



Back to top Go down
http://www.destinycrew.com
DizordA
Expert Noob - Level 0
Expert Noob - Level 0
avatar

Title : King of all Spammers
Attribute : Bar Brawler
Reputation : 1451
Number of posts : 9505
Location : Italy

PostSubject: Re: "Freedom of Speech" and attempting to understand it!   Sun Aug 29, 2010 9:36 am

I believe there's no human on earth who got freedom of speech.

Dictatorship or demokracy both deny freedom of speech the only difference is one of them looks better compared to the other. I also believe that the internet is one of the few things we have right now to get as close as possible but still its possible for the internet to be shut down.

I cant say really why there's no freedom of speech. Cause I dont know and I bet there would be millions of reasons why. Although one of the reasons I believe is power. Even if its demokracy or dictatorship there's always somebody or some people who have the power. If they get attacked verbally they could look weak and lose power and eventually get replaced.
Thats a short explanation of one of the reasons.

Then we would also have a totally different situation were it isnt the people with power who decide what you can say and not say.

For example:
In Sweden we had a case with an "artist"(although not in my eyes) called Lars Vilks which painted Muhammed as a dog. That made lots of noise in Sweden. He recieved several death threats. Later he started attacking muslims even more this time with a clip showing arab homosexuals making out while it played a song called "I wanna take you to the gaybar". This he did in front of a crowd of students in a school and the crowd did contain alot of muslims. He ended up being headbutted and would probably been killed if he didnt have some cops guarding him. Later there were also people who tried to burn down his house but they failed.

What Im trying to say with that example that it is also regular people who attack people with violence when they say something.

I hope people understand my point cause Im quite tired when Im writing this because of some stuff who happened earlier this weekend.

_________________
Since 30 July 2007 I had DESTINY above my head


When there is no hope,
I'll smoke some crack, I'll shoot some dope!
When theres no enemies,
I sit and stare at my T.V.
and in my ignorance,
I'll be a slave and sycophant!

Fact:When the Chuck Norris goes to sleep every night he checks his closet for Fedor.
Back to top Go down
theanalyzer
Noob Student - Level 1
Noob Student - Level 1
avatar

Title : Maker of Porn
Reputation : 308
Number of posts : 1362
Location : Pillar of Autumn

PostSubject: Re: "Freedom of Speech" and attempting to understand it!   Sun Aug 29, 2010 11:57 am

Humans have freedom of speech as much as they have freedom of actions. :P

The way actions are regulated, speech should be too imo.

But who decides what should be regulated and what not (in speech) brings in the Good/Bad argument, ie who decides whats right and whats wrong.

Apparently its slighty easy to bring the good bad distinction in the case of actions, not so for speech from what I see.
Back to top Go down
Xs
Spammer Noob - Level 0
Spammer Noob - Level 0
avatar

Title : Irrelevant
Attribute : *Affected by Stun Attack by Warmir*
Reputation : 462
Number of posts : 5264
Location : Pakistan
[9D](Acclaim) : Xss
[JD] : XsDenied
[FW] : XsDenied
Me? : What I've felt, what I've known, turn the pages, turn to stone...

PostSubject: Re: "Freedom of Speech" and attempting to understand it!   Sun Aug 29, 2010 1:08 pm

you guys have pointed out few things which is often used to suppress "freedom of speech".

1. Defamation
2. Slander

On both counts, I agree. That sort of speech should be questioned. However, there are a few other things to consider when speaking from the same perspective.

@Satanhas.
I understand what you are trying to say with that example and I agree entirely. That individual had no right to mock a religiously significant personality and that works in all directions. To elaborate, a Hindu mocking Jesus is wrong, and no, I'm not protecting monotheism. A Muslim mocking a Hindu religiously significant personality is also wrong.

@Analyzer.
Agreed, speech should be regulated BUT to what effect? Where and how would one draw the line?

If we only say religious slander or defamation is wrong, then we would have never discovered that the Earth happens to be round. Yes, there was persecution of the individual who first came out publicly with that concept.

The concept, of freedom of speech lies in open minds, in my illiterate opinion. As long as thought is governed with the understanding of what is right and what is wrong, humanity can enjoy freedom of speech. Take DESTINY as an example, virtually anything goes on these forums as long as the people who post understand the fine line between freedom of speech and slander/defamation. I could have very easily trashed all anti-Islamic threads in here (there are a few, and no I'm not talking about the one ur thinking about), heck I even started threads which were trying to understand exactly what God is, regardless of religion, you open the theology section and some eyes might pop out :P. Important thing, I kept an open mind and I kept one key factor in mind. Everyone here has an open mind. We're a nice and budding community and the best part is that us administrators are nothing more than the enforcers of this very same open mind understanding.

Another thing that has often been used to shut down speech is the claim of "Defamation". Where do we draw the line? Is it defamation to question the government? is it unpatriotic? Yet, it is often illegal. The problem lies in the same roots. Open minds.

There is an old saying "Absolute power corrupts absolutely." Like you said, the problem has to be within this very concept. How do we ensure that NO ONE has absolute power? I think you once asked me about the DESTINY poem and the paradox in it that how could DESTINY have no master, no Supreme ruler? Remember what I said? We are all masters, we are all equal, thus there is no master.

So what then should be the boundary to regulate speech?

I agree, actions need to be regulated. There is no way murder can be reversed and I also agree that speech needs to be regulated, there is no way someone can be "un-hurt" from the lies that have been cast in his/her direction. Like the cliche goes "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will hurt forever".

So how should speech be regulated? At what point, does the regulation become oppression?

I'm sure that every nation which claims to be Islamic would want Salman Rushdie so that it could make him repent his actions BUT is UK giving him political asylum protecting his speech called "Satanic Verses"? or is it hurting those who want to see him questioned for his slander? If you want a recent times story, for about 6 days the Islamic nations banned Youtube due to it running the Danish cartoons about Muhammad. The Youtube executives then saw the cash damage which was a result of them protecting the same "freedom of speech" and they removed the cartoons. Is that whats needed to "revoke" freedom of speech? monetary losses?

So, religions need to be protected? Agreed. Wait, God needs human protection?? FAIL! Humans want to protect their religions because they are insecure about their own standing with god, does that mean someones freedom of speech should be revoked? I'm sure you get what I'm saying by now, but if you don't. If I'm insecure about my tummy (yeah I got 1 ab, and I like it :P) would it be ok to enforce a no abs policy across the planet? Unfortunately nopes.

From the same principles, I ask you (and myself) where do we draw the line? This is like asking a question about what is ethical and what isn't. There will be a grey area in the middle.

My opinion, if you think its a grey area, walk away and this brings me back to the same line of thought.

Is there freedom of speech in our "evolved" and "educated" planet?
Where? and if our species is that daft that a few thousand year old concept hasn't been implemented, how can we bring about this change?

_________________
Martin Niemoller wrote:
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out--because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out--because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak out for me.



Back to top Go down
http://www.destinycrew.com
theanalyzer
Noob Student - Level 1
Noob Student - Level 1
avatar

Title : Maker of Porn
Reputation : 308
Number of posts : 1362
Location : Pillar of Autumn

PostSubject: Re: "Freedom of Speech" and attempting to understand it!   Sun Aug 29, 2010 1:40 pm

Xs wrote:
From the same principles, I ask you (and myself) where do we draw the line? This is like asking a question about what is ethical and what isn't. There will be a grey area in the middle.


Like I said, its gonna boil down to the whats right/ethical or wrong/unethical. Who defines good or bad.

Xs wrote:
Agreed, speech should be regulated BUT to what effect? Where and how would one draw the line?

Where do we draw the line?

So what then should be the boundary to regulate speech?

So how should speech be regulated?


Well the same model that govern /judges actions can be used to judge what sort of speech is allowed and what isnt.

Some take religion as a basis for that, others prefer to start all over from scratch (as I see) when they are simply repeating history (democracy, power to the people, the people decide whats best for them etc).

Now most people at this point would say that with limited speech, comes limited creativity... which is kinda what you meant by the earth flat thingy too.



Quote :
At what point, does the regulation become oppression?


Depends on ones pov on what constitutes oppression ^^


Back to top Go down
DizordA
Expert Noob - Level 0
Expert Noob - Level 0
avatar

Title : King of all Spammers
Attribute : Bar Brawler
Reputation : 1451
Number of posts : 9505
Location : Italy

PostSubject: Re: "Freedom of Speech" and attempting to understand it!   Mon Aug 30, 2010 8:18 am

Xss you got the wrong point from what I said. Although you did get that other point right.

Ill explain more tomorrow cause I dont have enough time today to write a "serious" post.

_________________
Since 30 July 2007 I had DESTINY above my head


When there is no hope,
I'll smoke some crack, I'll shoot some dope!
When theres no enemies,
I sit and stare at my T.V.
and in my ignorance,
I'll be a slave and sycophant!

Fact:When the Chuck Norris goes to sleep every night he checks his closet for Fedor.
Back to top Go down
Xs
Spammer Noob - Level 0
Spammer Noob - Level 0
avatar

Title : Irrelevant
Attribute : *Affected by Stun Attack by Warmir*
Reputation : 462
Number of posts : 5264
Location : Pakistan
[9D](Acclaim) : Xss
[JD] : XsDenied
[FW] : XsDenied
Me? : What I've felt, what I've known, turn the pages, turn to stone...

PostSubject: Re: "Freedom of Speech" and attempting to understand it!   Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:41 pm

Today one of my friends saw this post. yes I emailed the friend to have a look at this thread and asked him to reply here, but since he didn't reply here and instead choose to email me. I think its best if I simply paste an image of his perspectives, which in my opinion, are a new perspective, and new perspectives are always welcome when it comes to me. (I think)

Anyways, name blacked out because that is irrelevant, however he has signed the email so I guess that alias will have to do. (No this isn't me talking to myself, I only have 15 voices in my head and none get on the computer)


_________________
Martin Niemoller wrote:
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out--because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out--because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak out for me.



Back to top Go down
http://www.destinycrew.com
_Angelica_
Noob Apprentice - Level 4
Noob Apprentice - Level 4
avatar

Title : Pinky and the Brain
Reputation : 61
Number of posts : 893
Location : Arad, Romania
[9D](Acclaim) : ArchAngely
Me? : Me?: I overthink things

PostSubject: Re: "Freedom of Speech" and attempting to understand it!   Mon Aug 30, 2010 11:44 pm

Xs wrote:
(No this isn't me talking to myself, I only have 15 voices in my head and none get on the computer)
except xstester. Not always but more often...

on topic: I can't see the pic... sh1t! I hate the internet policy of this firm!!! (am I fired now?).
I get what you're saying about the companies who limit the freedom of speech in order to protect their capital but that's normal if you live in a capitalistic world. I also don't know why some of you are surprised by the actions taken by these companies...

off topic: oh... I see you raised the max quote limit to 5. that's good.

on topic: Freedom of speech is impossible right now. the concept is ok, I guess, but it's way before it's time. People are, how should I say it right, TOO DUMB for this concept. to explain my point of view, let's say you are a fan of a soccer/football/curling team and an individual whom you never saw before said something like "man they suck big time!" (let's place this event in the middle of the fans of that "sucking" team). Why does he say that? Because of the freedom of speech concept. Why ends he up being beaten up (or worst)? Because people can't handle freedom of speech. Who was too dumb here? ALL of them! First the man who made the remark was dumb because he made it in these times in the middle of a fanatic group of fans with words chosen very stupidly and second the mob who couldn't bare the criticism of that man. We are just too dumb to express our frustrations in a civilized manor and many react to criticism with violence rather than with counter arguments because they are not able to come up with the right words (violence is simpler). We also are mean. The combo of dumb and mean is lethal. We like to harass others (even a bit) because we have a bit of sadism in us. That all brings me to the conclusion on the beginning of my post that we are still to dumb for this concept. Or with nicer words, we are not evolved enough.
Some people (more intelligent I suppose) know about this dumbness of people so they limit this freedom of speech with laws and rules.
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: "Freedom of Speech" and attempting to understand it!   

Back to top Go down
 
"Freedom of Speech" and attempting to understand it!
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
DESTINY :: Off-Topic :: Globe-
Jump to:  
Forum create on Forumotion | © phpBB | Free forum support | Contact | Report an abuse | Free forum