Freedom of Speech and Freedom from Consequences.

a reply to: daskakik

That is all we have to deal in anyway.

Arguments based on speculation and opinion are going to do away with the maybes.

Then let's hear your argument for this: "They might also believe in freedom of speech, just not the way you do. Maybe that is even better for society."

I'll give you my arguments for the opposite as to why free speech is better for society.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

At least we agree that it's not "most". Well except for the Democrats.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I don't have one. You go.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

At least we agree that it's not "most". Well except for the Democrats.

We don't agree. There are other countries in the world. You just happened to pick one with the greatest respect for free speech. You should factor in China or Islamic countries.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Oh I am sorry. I thought this was about America. Of course many countries do not champion free speech. That's way too obvious. No need to debate about it.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

Oh I am sorry. I thought this was about America. Of course many countries do not champion free speech. That's way too obvious. No need to debate about it.

Universal human rights apply to all people.

a reply to: daskakik

I don't have one. You go.

Of course you don't.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Universal human rights apply to all people.

Of course. That's not a debate.

Anyway in Islamic countries people know the consequences of their free speech because to speak against their governments or Quran would be met with guaranteed punishment. But of course they STILL have the freedom to speak anyway. Nobody can take that away. They would be brave to speak against them.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So what, you do. What do you have?

a reply to: daskakik

So what, you do. What do you have?

I'll pass.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
I'll pass.

Told you maybes was all we had.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

Of course. That's not a debate.

Anyway in Islamic countries people know the consequences of their free speech because to speak against their governments or Quran would be met with guaranteed punishment. But of course they STILL have the freedom to speak anyway. Nobody can take that away. They would be brave to speak against them.

Their punishment is the direct result of them living under totalitarian conditions, not their speech. Living under freer conditions has different consequences.

a reply to: daskakik

Told you maybes was all we had.

You told me it was all you have. And that's all you're left with. I have a little more conviction.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Their punishment is the direct result of them living under totalitarian conditions, not their speech. Living under freer conditions has different consequences.

Of course. That's just stating the obvious. Everybody knows that.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

Of course. That's just stating the obvious. Everybody knows that.

Then how can you say their punishment is the consequences of their speech?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

You are talking about cause and effect in the philosophical sense.
I understand that you mean free speech itself don't "cause" anything. It's on people to decide to punish that.
However when you live in the Middle East you EXPECT punishment even if it's their decision to be violent on your free speech.
Makes sense?

Should people be able to speak their mind... absolutely, and we can. But, there 'may be' consequences for exercising your right to free speech, some will be good and some will be bad.

Any form of exercising your innate rights will have consequences, now whether governments have/can/will make some rights officially punishable all depends on the social contract you live under and how much you and others allow that contract to curtail.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

You are talking about cause and effect in the philosophical sense.
I understand that you mean free speech itself don't "cause" anything. It's on people to decide to punish that.
However when you live in the Middle East you EXPECT punishment even if it's their decision to be violent on your free speech.
Makes sense?

Not only philosophic, but in a realistic sense as well.

Sure, we can expect the superstitious and the dogmatic to choose violence and coercion over allowing others to speak. But my point from the beginning is there are no consequences to free speech, and that those who believe and defend the principle should demand freedom from consequences.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

those who believe and defend the principle should demand freedom from consequences.

I don't think anyone here disagrees with that. Perhaps "consequence" would be a wrong choice of word. Consequence implies that people deserve punishment. People are not "responsible" for what happen when they open their mouths. But they expect the RISKS in certain areas.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

I don't think anyone here disagrees with that. Perhaps "consequence" would be a wrong choice of word. Consequence implies that people deserve punishment. People are not "responsible" for what happen when they open their mouths. But they expect the RISKS in certain areas.

Exactly right.