It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The right to offend and the right to be offended

page: 15
51
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: DBCowboy

Quote me where I said I do not promote free speech.


So you are for free speech over civil speech.

Apologies.




posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

And people being emotionally "susceptible to hurtful language" is not physical?



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

I am for BOTH. That's what you do not understand. It's about RESPECT. Like I said you have the right to be an asshole. It's as simple as that.
Here's another question for you: since ATS support civil speech on this site, does that mean they do not support free speech?



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien




You mentioned "chilling effect". From what I read on wiki apparently it's about the fear of lawsuits if you say the wrong things.


In a legal context, yes, in a non-legal context, no.



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:04 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




And people being emotionally "susceptible to hurtful language" is not physical?


Yes it is physical, but I never made that statement. In fact, I called that statement "pseudoscience".



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: DBCowboy

I am for BOTH. That's what you do not understand. It's about RESPECT. Like I said you have the right to be an asshole. It's as simple as that.


I am for free speech. I utilize civil speech for a variety of reasons. I don't want to see civil speech mandated.






Here's another question for you: since ATS support civil speech on this site, does that mean they do not support free speech?


Obviously not.

But their house, their rules.



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien




I am for BOTH. That's what you do not understand. It's about RESPECT. Like I said you have the right to be an asshole. It's as simple as that.
Here's another question for you: since ATS support civil speech on this site, does that mean they do not support free speech?


Civil speech is a moral matter, not one of fundamental human rights.



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy



I am for free speech. I utilize civil speech for a variety of reasons.

See? You've just said that you support both.

Here's a beer.



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Of course. As I have stated it's about respect. It does not mean I want to force you to be respectful. If you are not being respectful to me I have the right to just walk away.



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: DBCowboy



I am for free speech. I utilize civil speech for a variety of reasons.

See? You've just said that you support both.

Here's a beer.


No.

I have to use civil speech on private venues. Being mandated to do something is not a "choice".



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Again who is forcing you to be civil? Other than the "private venues".



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: DBCowboy

Again who is forcing you to be civil? Other than the "private venues".



Previously spoken of, is the Chilling Effect so I won't rehash.


I see a movement to dictate speech. This thread alone illustrates how many are actually against free speech and are for "civil" speech.

If this trend continues then we might see censorship in order to become more "civil" towards each other.

Personally, I would be against censorship.



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:17 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

It's strange that you see posters on this thread being against free speech. Perhaps you read too much into posters' words?
BTW "chilling effect" is about legality.

DBCowboy, do not worry. We (except possibly very rare exceptions) are ALL for free speech. And if there's a "trend" against free speech then we will fight against it, guaranteed.



edit on 4/11/2017 by Deaf Alien because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:24 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

This thread including every single post or reply within its entirety has deeply offended me!!!!! I want it removed NOW!!

I used to be like all of you offensive types, then I decided to change my life after watching this vid, being offended is a fantastic life choice and has been to the benefit of ME!!! ME!!!! MEEEE!!!!!



Joking aside and being serious. Narcissism being encouraged and accepted within society, alongside the Dunning-Kruger effect being worshiped these days does freedom of speech no favours whatsoever.



Definition of Conversation: a talk, especially an informal one, between two or more people, in which news and ideas are exchanged.

RIP Conversation



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien




BTW "chilling effect" is about legality.


It isn't, as has already been pointed out, but carry on.



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: DBCowboy

I am for BOTH. That's what you do not understand. It's about RESPECT. Like I said you have the right to be an asshole. It's as simple as that.


I am for free speech. I utilize civil speech for a variety of reasons. I don't want to see civil speech mandated.










It already is! Check this out.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:30 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope



In a legal context, a chilling effect is the inhibition or discouragement of the legitimate exercise of natural and legal rights by the threat of legal sanction.

Literally the first sentence on that wiki page you linked.



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:30 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

You scared me. LOL.



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien




Literally the first sentence on that wiki page you linked.


That's why it starts "In a legal context.." but later on, "Outside of the legal context in common usage; any coercion or threat of coercion (or other unpleasantries) can have a chilling effect on a group of people regarding a specific behavior, and often can be statistically measured or be plainly observed. "

If you read only the first sentance of an essay, you're going to miss out on a lot.



posted on Apr, 11 2017 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Outside of legal context it's about propaganda, false advertisements and scary statistics. Nothing at all to do with the fear of being sued. So it still doesn't apply here. Sorry.
And no I do not read only the first sentence.




top topics



 
51
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join