posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 09:05 AM
I live in the UK where we pride ourselves on how “tolerant” our society is. We have made huge differences in the last 50 years or so to stamp out
discrimination of any type, whether you are back, white, homosexual, heterosexual, man, women or even if you are transgender our society says we
accept you. It is fantastic and we are constantly moving towards a more tolerant society with the end goal being that everybody is accepted by who
they are and not by their social label. It is a social taboo to discriminate, stereotype or insult somebody based on their social label, in fact it
is a crime.
This is a crime we like to call “hate crime”, this means that if one was to use language that is offensive to a particular social group’s label
one can be liable under the law to expect a punishment. This punishment is based on us not being a danger to society as a whole but because we have
“offended” one group in society. These insults are a example however of one expressing freedom of speech, a natural right for all men and our
society it seems will only tolerate freedom of speech as long as society agrees with what your are saying.
Makes the Idea of the tolerant society look suddenly ironic, I think it is something of an oxymoron to say we have a tolerant society with free
speech, just so long as you tolerate what society says you must and you say what society says you should say.
Society itself is often not defined by the public but by the political and media elite who tell us what the society that we live in must tolerate.
They do this through the laws that they pass the jurisprudence they preach and the media they brain wash us with. This in turn is helping in an
indirect way to slowly limit our freedom of speech and even challenge our freedom of thought. We cannot say what we perhaps might want to say for
freer of offending a group in society and being punished for it.
Let me use an analogy so as not to offend anyone one, sorry i stole it form Orwell. Let’s pretend there is a farm with one felid, in this felid we
have 5 sheep 3 pigs and 1 farmer. The farmer says the sheep and pigs should not be discriminated so when it comes to feeding time he gives the sheep
and pigs one bag of food. So the seep’s bag has to go 5 ways but the pig only goes 3 ways this upsets the sheep. So the sheep complains to the
farmer but because of his fanatical belief that the pigs should not be discriminated, he punishes the sheep by taking away half of their food. The
sheep have spoken against what the farmer (society) says is right and have been punished to appease a minority group.
That is what is going on in our society, we are legislating to appease minority groups in society with the long term goal to make us all the same.
They are doing this by limiting our freedom of speech and thought. I agree with this, I think it is wrong to speak out against any group in society, I
strongly defend their right not to be insulted and discriminated. But am i only doing this because of what society is telling me to do or I am doing
it because it is what I truly believe. I would hope it is the later, but I know this means i must challenge the freedom of speech of those who
disagree with me. This is not a problem for me because freedom of speech is systematic with the ideals of liberal progressiveness, an ideologically I
find it difficult to agree with. I am against absolute freedom of speech both ideologically and because it limits moves for a tolerant society, which
The question then is how far should freedom of speech go, were the line, when does asking questions and challenging groups in society become
unacceptable. It is a contradiction to have a tolerant society coupled with absolute freedom of speech so where do you all think the line is. You may
have completely different views than me feel free to shear them