Limitations On Freedom
CommunistWithAGun
Local Propaganda Guy Join Date: 2003-04-30 Member: 15953Members
Local Propaganda Guy Join Date: 2003-04-30 Member: 15953Members
in Discussions
<div class="IPBDescription">We like to pretend to be free...</div> ...But are we?
This is a question I loved to ask in highschool because It always angered the patriotic flag waver my history/english/other dude/teacher was. We often argued on many things, this being one of them. For example, We have the Freedom of Speech. Of course that SOUNDS great. We really don't though. There are several stipulations on that freedom. Theres my example. Discuss.
This is a question I loved to ask in highschool because It always angered the patriotic flag waver my history/english/other dude/teacher was. We often argued on many things, this being one of them. For example, We have the Freedom of Speech. Of course that SOUNDS great. We really don't though. There are several stipulations on that freedom. Theres my example. Discuss.
Comments
The "freedom of speech" is not literal. Often people believe that the first amendment says something along the lines of "You are allowed to say whatever you want and there is nothing we can do about it." In fact, it does not. I however, am too lazy to grab a history book and write exactly what it says so I'll just stop right there.
Let's take this whole freedom into perspective. Freedom in our constitution was defined by the colonials who wrote it, and their views are often different from ours. They wanted to prevent American from becoming like England, with it's religious prosecution and censorship (dono details, but I believe that's basically it :-/). That was their definition of freedom.
Nowadays, the word freedom is tossed around like [insert clever metaphor]. People seem to think that freedom gives them the right to go out on a street, strip naked and start screaming at the top of their lungs at 3 in the morning. The thing with freedom is that it should not be taken literally.
And that's a wrap.
It's their views. If they want to be prejudice against a certain type of person, we have no right to tell them to change who they are. That's like telling someone to change their hat, because the hat they're wearing isn't one that you're fond of. If they do commit illegal acts, however, they should be punished. (Illegal acts meaning murder, destruction of property, etc..) Just like everyone else. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
<a href='http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html' target='_blank'>Bill of Rights</a>
your talking about modern day america i take it.
I dont want to get too caught up in that as it will probably lead to more nation bashing, but...
freedom of speech is pretty much a joke anyway, i mean its nice that we (im talking about the 'lower classes' or people with no power, in britain here, but it goes for america and probably most other western countries) have freedom of speech, and that we can debate what our governments are doing, and that we dont get carted off for saying things which offend the government.
But at the end of the day, we have little effect of anything and more often than not our educated disscuions are little more than facile illusionary debates between 'the right' and 'the left' both of whos views lie somewhere in the realm of 'what we are alowed to know'.
without wanting to sound too much like a paranoid young person, I have little doubt that most of what gets put out to the masses (via TV/media) is false/ warped, merely designed to keep us ignorant and asking few questions, this leads to 2 sides (right and left) debating over what turns out to be pretty pointless.
moving away from freedom of speech, living where i do affords me the luxuries of being able to get a free education, and find a job, make a living for myself while also supporting the current government through all my taxes. when you look at other places in the world we're pretty much at the 'top of the ladder' in terms of wealth and prospects, so i cant complain about my imediate future.
You are right, it is warped, but not necessarily false. TV/media is controled by editors who put the news forward in their opinions and despite what anyone tries to tell you there is no such thing as unbiased journalism. The person who wrote the story certianly has some view of the situation, and if they don't the editor surely will.
In which direction?
Laws don't give you Freedom of Speech. Speech is a natural right. Laws can only take that freedom away.
Then again, the only reason anything is "bad" is because your told it is. Although I think hate groups are bad... <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif'><!--endemo-->
Freedom of speech can be misunderstanding. Yes, we do have the right to say whatever we want, even comments which could harm others. No one can take this right that God gave it to you. However, this freedom must be controlled. Now, I'm not talking about laws, or anything like that, I'm just stating logic thoughts.
There is a phrase which I always use: <i>"Your freedom ends when the freedom of another begins"</i>. This means that, yes you can say what you want and do what you want, but this freedom must come to an end when you are entering the freedom of another person. Just like a dictatorship, they invade your freedom. This freedom and morals should walk hand in hand.
Now, I have another contreversial question about our freedom in this world. Are we always free? Do we always have the liberty and privacy?
Walk down your street and count how many cameras film you.
Once again, sorry if I said any BS. I'm only 14 and I'm trying to be a bit more mature than most people of my age. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Is freedom of speech limited when <b>the speech poses a clear and present danger</b>
or is speech limited <b>during a time of clear and present danger</b><!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->?? aargh I'm seriously dying to know.
Is freedom of speech limited when <b>the speech poses a clear and present danger</b>
or is speech limited <b>during a time of clear and present danger</b><!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->?? aargh I'm seriously dying to know. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Speech is always limited. You can get in trouble though during a crisis time, like I made some comments after 9-11 that almost got my redneck town angry enough to lynch me. Ignorant fools <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Is freedom of speech limited when <b>the speech poses a clear and present danger</b>
or is speech limited <b>during a time of clear and present danger</b><!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->?? aargh I'm seriously dying to know. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
The clear and present danger test is no longer used in American courts. The government is now only permitted to legally limit your speech if it provokes "imminent lawless action", which is a much narrower and more defined area than clear and present danger.