The right to offend and the right to be offended

This man is on point. Deluxe.

Freedom of Speech and Right to Offend

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: DBCowboy

Civility and decorum are some of the biggest contributors to a functioning society. When you take the greedy route and proclaim that JUST because you have the right to say something then you should it causes a breakdown in society. Sure you have the right to say whatever dickish things come to your mind, but that doesn't mean you should.

And just because there are consequences for your words doesn't mean that your freedom of speech is infringed. The 1st Amendment only applies to government restricting speech. That's it.

Well yes it was intended to protect our right to oppose tyranny in government, the right to speak out and have redress of grievances against st the govt without being thrown in jail. I think there may be some overlap since now the govt seeks to penalize people for supposed hate speech, not to mention a certain Potus sicked the IRS on the Tea Party because they spoke out against his Marxist agenda.

a rreply to les misanthrope

He ought to know as he is a self described anarcho libertarian socialist influenced by communists like Bakunin....and considering the McCarthy era he would appreciate being able to spread communist propaganda and of course he does (never mind the real soviet style communists quelled free speech themselves ). www.truth-out.org...

a reply to: DBCowboy

Freedom of speech is not absolute. There is nothing wrong with respecting the meaning of others but speaking or writing a totally other view. But common sense is important. Words can hurt more than physical pain. And the pen is mightier than the sword (Bulwer Lytton). I think I'm mentally strong enough to put in perspective the meaning of others. But I thank God I've never been bullied in my life.

Offended, offensive, peoples freedom of speech and all is fine and dandy until you step on their religion or nationalistic pride.

Pride and ego are easily offended, especially in public.

Freedom of speech, whats that? Go ahead and practice it, see where it gets you...

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: DBCowboy

Civility and decorum are some of the biggest contributors to a functioning society. When you take the greedy route and proclaim that JUST because you have the right to say something then you should it causes a breakdown in society. Sure you have the right to say whatever dickish things come to your mind, but that doesn't mean you should.

And just because there are consequences for your words doesn't mean that your freedom of speech is infringed. The 1st Amendment only applies to government restricting speech. That's it.

Well yes it was intended to protect our right to oppose tyranny in government, the right to speak out and have redress of grievances against st the govt without being thrown in jail. I think there may be some overlap since now the govt seeks to penalize people for supposed hate speech, not to mention a certain Potus sicked the IRS on the Tea Party because they spoke out against his Marxist agenda.

This is falling on deaf ears with the sitting President starting a literal war with the press just because they print stuff that he doesn't like. In fact, I feel like Trump has wiped his ass with the 1st Amendment FAR more than Obama misused it. In far more grievous ways.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Aazadan


I would however be all for silencing someone like Alex Jones.

Then you can't say you're for free speech if you are placing conditions on what is being said.

Free speech doesn't have to be absolute. For example, someone else that I do think should be silenced is the Veterans Today people. Their business is based on outright lies, masquerading as news. If that's their product they should either be banned from selling it, or forced to put highly visible disclaimers on their site that their stories are false.

a reply to: Aazadan

There are tons of people I'd like to see shut their mouths.

But I have no authority, no right over what people say. Nor should I.

Nor should anyone.

I've always thought that if a person is offended because of words alone, then they deserve to be offended.

Don't know if anyone's seen this, but thought it was funny, true and worth a share.

www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: wheresthebody
I've always thought that if a person is offended because of words alone, then they deserve to be offended.

Right, tell that to the cops and see what happens; After you call them "pigs" "Barney" or "bitch"

They will tell you to stop resisting while beating the dog **** out of you. But don't be offended. They felt threatened....


Consider how someone will "interpret" your offensive language. Or you can just run your mouth and deal with the consequences.

Discretion is the better part of Valor.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
(Disclaimer; This is not a thread about ATS, it's rules, it's staff or it's management.)


A recent thread caused me to think about the right to offend.

I searched and found an essay titled, "Freedom of Speech means Freedom to Offend".

rebirthofreason.com...

It talked about many of the things I was thinking about.

With the possible exception of property, there is nothing more sacred than one's freedom of speech. Freedom of speech means the freedom to say with words, spoken or written, anything one chooses to say. It is not freedom to say only what offends no one, it is not freedom to say only what agrees with some authority's official line; it means freedom to say anything, even if everyone else in the whole world is offended by it and even if it contradicts every official doctrine of every authority that ever existed.

Self-censorship is an on-going activity in our society. We do it as to not offend. Offending someone or some group has become a crime of sorts. Sure, there are laws for libel and such, but just giving an opinion on any given topic is sure to fire someone up.
But when we self-censor, we are voluntarily denying ourselves the right to free expression.

It is okay to say offensive things. It is also okay to be offended by such things.

Being offended by anything just indicates you are human and have your own opinions. But just as your opinions are paramount to you, opinions that you disagree with are just as paramount to others.

We live in a society that has an ever shrinking obligation to upholding freedom. We only defend what we like, and condemn what we don't. We've stopped looking at freedom of speech and have filtered it to "socially acceptable speech".

From BLM to the KKK to innocent posts on an internet site, we are inundated with opinions and (at the same time) we are inundated with condemnation of such opinions.

Criticism is also free speech, silencing others is not.

You cannot use your freedoms to deny others of their freedoms, no matter how offensive they may appear.

I don't think people understand or respect free expression any more.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Aazadan

There are tons of people I'd like to see shut their mouths.

But I have no authority, no right over what people say. Nor should I.

Nor should anyone.

So people should be able to lie, because that's still free speech? How do you feel about laws directed at libel and slander? How do you feel about laws that limit what claims marketers can make about their products?

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Aazadan

There are tons of people I'd like to see shut their mouths.

But I have no authority, no right over what people say. Nor should I.

Nor should anyone.

So people should be able to lie, because that's still free speech? How do you feel about laws directed at libel and slander? How do you feel about laws that limit what claims marketers can make about their products?

It doesn't matter what I feel.

My "feelings" are immaterial.

You are trying to find ways to justify censorship.

I'm trying to find ways to keep freedoms of expression, free.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Technically you are just complaining about it.

Aazadan is just giving examples of things against free speech that already exist. You should be trying to get those things reversed and how you feel about them matters in that regard.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: DBCowboy

Technically you are just complaining about it.

Aazadan is just giving examples of things against free speech that already exist. You should be trying to get those things reversed and how you feel about them matters in that regard.

Heaven forbid, if we start basing laws on how I "feel" about them.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Like I said, you are just complaining not drafting bills or passing laws.

ETA: I mean, the thread is about how you feel on the topic.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: DBCowboy

Like I said, you are just complaining not drafting bills or passing laws.

ETA: I mean, the thread is about how you feel on the topic.

It's more of an observation.

People think that being offended empowers them to silence others.

But, of course, you are absolutely free to say whatever you want about my motives and motivations.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
It's more of an observation.

People think that being offended empowers them to silence others.

I see that that is part of it.

But, of course, you are absolutely free to say whatever you want about my motives and motivations.

I'm going by what you said:

I'm trying to find ways to keep freedoms of expression, free.

ETA: From the OP.

I don't think people understand or respect free expression any more.