It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Freedom of Speech

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 05:33 PM
Whilst arguing away on PTS it has made me think is our freedom of speech really under attack. I myself have often used the phrases the thought police and the people police but is it really like that. When someone says something that is contentious or offensive to people is it right to shut them up, lock them up. Is it better to hear extreme views and to challenge those views to educate and enlighten, to remove ignorance and barriers.

You cannot lock up or shut away somebody's thoughts, is it better to have these thought and idea's in the open where we can hear whats going on. Prohibition of anything does not remove the problem, it dose not go away, rather it festers and becomes a bigger problem for the future. There is a fine line between free speech and what is seen as offensive. As an example a number of European countries have laws re the Holocaust, anyone denignying the official story can be imprisoned, but why, why should a person be imprisoned for having a different view to an historical event, what threat if any dose that pose.

And again this does nothing to correct the thoughts of these people if that is the objective in locking them up, to me such an experience would harden such views. But are we at risk from loosing our right to voice what we think, is PC, Hate crime etc. the right way to go. Are these just vehicles for an agenda to remove our rights and ultimately to control our thoughts. Are we all patsies being used against each other to achieve that end, it reminds me of that old English saying of; I would never of dreamt of that. That came from the days of witch hunting where a women who had dreams were seen as witches and therefore people would deny they had dreams.

There has been many attempts throughout history to stifle the views and beliefs of others, from witchcraft to the inquisition, are todays events just part of that process or is there a much more sinister plan.

posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 09:00 AM
I guess it all depends on who decides on what is enlightenment and ignorance.
Whats enlightenment to one person can be ignorance to another.
At the end of the day its really just one persons point of view versus anothers'.

It can be frustrating when its different laws and rules for different people.
Thats when bias and hypocracy come into it.
Whats good for the goose is good for the gander is probably a fair motto.
Also " a two way street".

I know when I see certain sections of society getting preferential treatment over
another it makes my blood boil.

I think hate crimes had to be introduced. The world is getting more
violent than it used to be. I think we can "think" what we like but have to watch what
we say or how we say it. Its one of the responsibilities of living in a multicultural society. We ALL have rights. No matter our skin colour, religion or culture.

and my thoughts on the holocaust example is ....its either history and it happened
or it didnt and it was a lie. I think there is way to much proof to say that it did happen, so saying the opposite is insane. There may be sinister people and reasons behind it that can come to light as time goes on, but the fact that millions died isnt
debatable really. Its a fact.

I think its scary when you think that history could be rewritten on flimsy evidence,
a biased opinion or worse still by educated people with an agenda.

I expect historic scholars to have an open mind, an open heart and to be neutral
in writing history and chronicleing historical facts. If they cant do their job professionally, then they should pick some other occupation.IMO.

I agree with you that its best to know what people are thinking than for someone to feel they have to hide it.
Good post, thanks, it got me thinking.


log in