Thread: free speech zone

Originally Posted by malac

You should avoid naturalistic fallacies. They're bad for you.

Just because we have more flexible policies on free speech than any other country, doesn't mean we ought not to complain when we lose them.

I never said we shouldn't complain just because we are better off than other nations. The point of the above post was to show that other countries, largely Europes, shouldn't be ignored in it's rights violations. At any rate, our individual free speech isn't being taken away directly. Rather, we've lost privacy rights, some court rights, and even to a lesser but still fairly significant degree some media rights. This could lead to losing individual free speech, but it hasn't happened yet.

Originally Posted by Xei

There's plenty.

Freedom of speech by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The States is pretty great but it's not the lone bastion of freedom that, judging by the rhetoric from within, almost everybody living there thinks it is. There's 12 countries above you in the human development index which measures political freedom among other factors, including all of the Scandinavian countries.

As I said earlier in the thread, the number of arrests made under this free speech zone thing are pretty small; as are those under 'hate speech' laws. They're covered here:

Free speech zone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Doesn't only allowing pro-Bush signs near Bush seem pretty bad to you, though?

That's because the index is measuring political freedoms as a whole. I would never claim we are one of the best as far as all freedoms are concerned. In a lot of ways we are soley at the mercy of the government or DHS. Just as far as individual free speech, (what the OP is referencing,) there are none better. The examples you presented are pretty egregarious and the few which were illegal really make me wince. (When the president is on private property, there is little wrong with dismissing protestors other than ignorance, for example. When he is on public property, dismissing protestors is a crime.) The Bush presidency broke so many laws concerning our rights it is incredible. That whole time in our history had us heading for fascism and with it being less than one presidency behind us, the damage hasn't been undone. Thing about free speech zones is they were illegal and an implementation of a corrupt presidency. I am not justifying them, but hate speech laws are fully within the law in some countries.

And many of those 'Scandanavian' countries might fine me for wearing a shirt that says 'Homo's Go to Hell.' Despite how much that behaviour appals me, it is screwed up that people can't partake in it. Many think our freedom of speech goes too far. I can spread the knowledge on how to make an A-bomb if I am not telling them to/organizing a group of them to use one or make one. So even if a limitation on free speech is justifiable, it is still a limitation. Political freedoms as a whole? Maybe Scandanavian/Nordic countries beat us out. On free speech in general? Not a chance.

At any rate, thank you for bringing to my attention those illegal arrests. It is very interesting and frightening how the President and Secret Service can circumvent the laws and just get away with it...