Virtual Teen Forums
 

Go Back   Virtual Teen Forums > >
Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read Chat Room

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old May 16th, 2018, 04:20 PM   #1
Murk
Member+
 
Murk's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: February 4, 2016
Location: Everywhere
Age: 16
Gender: Male
Blog Entries: 7
Talking War on #1A

Because "War on #2A", "Disscussion on rights", my life, and school isn't enough stress and work, I am starting another, yes, another thread, on rights.


This is a disscussion about the 1st ammendment of the US, and the Right to freedom of speech. This disscussion may also apply to other countriesas well.
Concepts include:
  • Free speech
  • "Hate Speech"
  • Etc...
Let's begin >

I'll answer anything, and I'm up for a chat. pm me
My Blog
Quote:
Originally Posted by THOMAS JEFFERSON
ALL TYRANNY NEEDS TO GAIN A FOOTHOLD, IS FOR PEOPLE OF GOOD CONSCIENCE TO REMAIN SILENT.
"If you got it flaunt it ;p"-Alex1s
Murk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2018, 07:24 PM   #2
Voice_Of_Unreason
Awesome Poster
 
Voice_Of_Unreason's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: July 7, 2016
Location: Irrationality
Gender: Male
Default Re: War on #1A

Quote:
Originally Posted by First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
In my opinion, the First Amendment is essential for a democracy. A fair and just society cannot exist where there is censorship of beliefs and opinions by the government. Be it those beliefs be religious or secular in nature, the government shouldn't be censoring it, especially when said censorship is based upon personal opinions of offense.

Hate speech should not be prohibited by the government. And before y'all go into the "well, you can't say fire in a theater" rant, that is a completely separate issue from Hate Speech as defined by activists. One deals with immediate threats of mass chaos, the other is hurting someone's feelings. Hate speech is free speech, and censoring it is one step closer to 1984.
Voice_Of_Unreason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2018, 09:32 PM   #3
Dalcourt
Legendary Member
 
Dalcourt's Forum Picture
 
Name: Peanut
Join Date: February 25, 2014
Location: Crescent City
Gender: Neutral
Blog Entries: 4
Default Re: War on #1A

Seriously?

What sort of discussion is that going to be once again?
Everyone is for freedom, free speech ...denies the fact that hate speech is dangerous and one second later they all get their panties in a twist for evil liberals using the right of free speech against them.

So obviously there is a War on Amendment #2. What really is this war? Liberals right to use free speech to express their opinion against the use of weapons. And your War on Amendment #1 is nothing more than deny people the right to have a different opinion.

Reasoning really has become useless in a place like this.
Likes: (1)
Dalcourt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2018, 02:47 AM   #4
Murk
Member+
 
Murk's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: February 4, 2016
Location: Everywhere
Age: 16
Gender: Male
Blog Entries: 7
Default Re: War on #1A

So, the first thing I want to say here is, restriction of speech, is no longer free speech.
I know some people are in favor of laws against "hate speech", free speech is the right to offend with fear of persecution or prosecution.

So why, do you feel it ok to strip one if their rights as a human, to keep your own feeling's from being hurt by what they say?

I'll answer anything, and I'm up for a chat. pm me
My Blog
Quote:
Originally Posted by THOMAS JEFFERSON
ALL TYRANNY NEEDS TO GAIN A FOOTHOLD, IS FOR PEOPLE OF GOOD CONSCIENCE TO REMAIN SILENT.
"If you got it flaunt it ;p"-Alex1s
Murk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2018, 11:33 AM   #5
ShineintheDark
Awesome Poster
 
Name: Magnus
Join Date: April 11, 2017
Location: United Kingdom
Gender: Male
Default Re: War on #1A

Everyone defends their free speech whilst infringing upon someone else's. Whether it's Conservatives who see Nazis as very wonderful people but hate those damn queer protesters or Liberals who mass walkouts but will shut down a speech over hurt feelings. There is no 'war' to discuss here, no one here has had their free speech taken away you're all just riled up over nothing. Count Dankula is the closest thing conservatives have had to claim they're oppressed and even then he got a minor fine for it.
ShineintheDark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 21st, 2018, 09:20 PM   #6
Hermes
VT Lover
 
Join Date: October 15, 2010
Gender: Male
Default Re: War on #1A

From over in the amendment 2A discussion we are invited to believe that the USA has completely free speech whereas most of Europe has "mostly free" speech in the sense that hate speech is banned.

Actually, it is more complicated than that as the USA, like the UK and probably many other places, has anti-defamation laws.

My preference would be for completely free speech and for the usual reason that giving the government license to censor it can be a slippery slope. It is also the case that as soon as you introduce an exception for hate speech someone will come up with a way to stir up hatred without it being technically classed as hate speech.

None of that means I want to see people spouting hatred. I believe we should educate people out of being racist, xenophobic, sexist, homophobic and religiously prejudiced.

Europe does seem to be scared of another Hitler but it is probably worth bearing in mind that's Hilter's approach of blaming the Jews for people's troubles in Germany at the time need those troubles to be there in the first place.
Likes: (2)
Hermes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2018, 11:10 AM   #7
Murk
Member+
 
Murk's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: February 4, 2016
Location: Everywhere
Age: 16
Gender: Male
Blog Entries: 7
Default Re: War on #1A

Interesting take @Hermes
Right, the UK and other countries, a citizen can be jailed and sometimes actually imprisoned for years just for speaking a point that someone or a group of someones, doesn't like. In the US, the 1st amendment legally protects us from that, in turn protecting us from a dictatorship similar to noko or an extreme such as Nazi Germany where only one ideology is allowed. While the UK hasn't gone to dictatorship yet, you've got to realize, once a government controls a citizen, and able to single out groups of ideologies to silence them, there is no freedom. You can't say what you want, you can't do what you want, you can't have what you want, you can't defend yourself, you have to do what the government tells you to. That is tyranny. So as soon as a country starts regulating speech, they're stepping on the slope to communism or worse. As long as they stay there, it's not a matter of IF anymore, it's a matter of WHEN.

I'll answer anything, and I'm up for a chat. pm me
My Blog
Quote:
Originally Posted by THOMAS JEFFERSON
ALL TYRANNY NEEDS TO GAIN A FOOTHOLD, IS FOR PEOPLE OF GOOD CONSCIENCE TO REMAIN SILENT.
"If you got it flaunt it ;p"-Alex1s
Murk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2018, 01:31 PM   #8
Voice_Of_Unreason
Awesome Poster
 
Voice_Of_Unreason's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: July 7, 2016
Location: Irrationality
Gender: Male
Default Re: War on #1A

Here's a question. If the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to modern semi-auto rifles because the Founding Fathers could have never foreseen them, then how does the 1st Amendment apply to the instantaneous, worldwide self-publication platform that is the internet. The Founders certainly wouldn't have been able to see that, back when the only way to get people to listen to you was to stand on a soapbox or try to get published in the small handful of regional newspapers.
Likes: (1)
Voice_Of_Unreason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2018, 09:54 AM   #9
Dalcourt
Legendary Member
 
Dalcourt's Forum Picture
 
Name: Peanut
Join Date: February 25, 2014
Location: Crescent City
Gender: Neutral
Blog Entries: 4
Default Re: War on #1A

@Murk interesting point to you made in your lecture to @Hermes. It is quite naive to think a constitution and some amendments would save us from an evil regime. Do you think the Nazis gave a fuck about whatever was constitution or rights in Germany? They just overthrew and changed everything according to their ideology and that is the point of every evil regime. In fact it would be way easier nowadays for a US President to become a dictator and destroy all our rights that it would be for a German Chancellor these days. Germany learned from mistakes and loopholes...something we in the States won't before something real bad happens to us as did to the Germans.
Dalcourt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2018, 07:58 PM   #10
Hermes
VT Lover
 
Join Date: October 15, 2010
Gender: Male
Default Re: War on #1A

Quote:
Originally Posted by Murk View Post
Interesting take @Hermes
Right, the UK and other countries, a citizen can be jailed and sometimes actually imprisoned for years just for speaking a point that someone or a group of someones, doesn't like. In the US, the 1st amendment legally protects us from that, in turn protecting us from a dictatorship similar to noko or an extreme such as Nazi Germany where only one ideology is allowed.
I did say I didn't think these "hate speech" laws were not a good idea but they don't seem to be about political ideology. I could, for example, criticise capitalism, or socialism, or communism. I can say that the sloppy standards and penny pinching that led to the Grenfell Tower fire were an absolute disgrace and that the treatment of the Windrush generation by the home office is appalling, the last two of which are deeply critical of the current government and no-one will put me in prison for that.

For the most part the hate speech laws seem to be well-intentioned, even if I disagree with them. There was something in one of these amendment threads about having the freedom to follow a religion of your choosing or none as you see fit and the religious hatred hate speech law clearly stems from the fact that the UK now has a variety of religions practised and, though Christianity is still the most common, others are also common.

Personally, I would have addressed this differently. If there is a desire for all religions to be equal under the law then it would be much better to repeal blasphemy laws that favour Christianity rather than enact legislation that makes people think twice about criticising other religions. I think it is fine to say that you believe your religion is right and the others are wrong, or indeed that they are all fairy stories and if this kind of criticism offends them people should develop thicker skins. It is absurd to believe in an all-powerful God and then that he needs protection from insults from the people on Earth. Any physical retaliation for these kind of comments should be punished.

But having a debate is very different from harassment. If one person goes out of his way to make another person's life a misery or a group of people continually harass people who follow a different religion then that does need to stop and it is reasonable to consider a sustained pattern of verbal abuse along with other types of harassment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Murk View Post
While the UK hasn't gone to dictatorship yet, you've got to realize, once a government controls a citizen, and able to single out groups of ideologies to silence them, there is no freedom...
I don't expect the UK to become a dictatorship any time soon. And, while communism almost always involves a regime that stifles dissenting voices, there are regimes that stifle dissenting voices that are very far from communist so the two concepts are not one and the same. In the west we have even propped up such regimes.

A much bigger concern is the extent to which the media manipulate public opinion and therefore the extent to which politicians cosy up to the media. I am thinking of a newspaper that closed a few years ago here after some scandal and the editor was found to be in the same social set as the prime minister at the time and it was believed they had far more contact that official records would show.

There is no easy answer to this, either. In theory, anyone can publish stuff these days on the Internet, including social media such as Facebook, but whereas some people may have genuine information about the government's dishonest intentions, others are spreading rumours as if they were facts and have done nothing in the way of fact checking or research.

Last edited by Hermes; May 27th, 2018 at 08:02 PM.
Hermes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2018, 09:26 PM   #11
Voice_Of_Unreason
Awesome Poster
 
Voice_Of_Unreason's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: July 7, 2016
Location: Irrationality
Gender: Male
Default Re: War on #1A

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalcourt View Post
@Murk interesting point to you made in your lecture to @Hermes. It is quite naive to think a constitution and some amendments would save us from an evil regime. Do you think the Nazis gave a fuck about whatever was constitution or rights in Germany? They just overthrew and changed everything according to their ideology and that is the point of every evil regime.
You got to remember that Germany at the time of the Nazi rise was a broken nation that has just suffered a horrific loss less than 15 years before-hand, where over 2 million Germans, 4% of their population, died in a pointless war. And you got to remember that Germany was severely punished and humiliated in the wake of said war, one of the punishments being the establishment of a new, unpopular government and a new, unpopular constitution. One of the biggest flaws of said constitution is the ability for the Chancellor to abolish constitutionally defined rights and establish martial law in the case of an "emergency".

Simply put, the Germans were a broken people in a broken nation. They hated the new government, and they hated themselves. When someone came up and said they wanted to restore Germany to it's prior glory and convinced them that the Jews, not themselves, were the cause of the problem, they naturally went with it with few questions. And when you had a constitution with a loophole that could easily be exploited by staging an emergency, like let's say claiming Russians were attempting to undermine the government (hmm, that sounds familiar...), you just had a recipe for dictatorship.


Quote:
In fact it would be way easier nowadays for a US President to become a dictator and destroy all our rights that it would be for a German Chancellor these days. Germany learned from mistakes and loopholes...something we in the States won't before something real bad happens to us as did to the Germans.
Like what? Throwing people in prison for doing a Nazi salute?

I'll also like some more backing for that claim. Aka any backing in the slightest, because you've said nothing that would make me believe that.
Likes: (1)
Voice_Of_Unreason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2018, 10:02 PM   #12
Dalcourt
Legendary Member
 
Dalcourt's Forum Picture
 
Name: Peanut
Join Date: February 25, 2014
Location: Crescent City
Gender: Neutral
Blog Entries: 4
Default Re: War on #1A

@PlasmaHam maybe you wanna read the German constitutionon text that is called "Grundgesetz" and how the system of checks and balances works there?

If you are at it you can go on reading those texts from other nations, too.

America is not the holy grail of constitution texts there are other free countries with sensible laws in the world, too. And if we would educate ourselves a bit about that it, we Americans wouldn't be seen as arrogant morons by most other people in the world.
Dalcourt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2018, 08:15 PM   #13
trackinglife
Member
 
Name: David
Join Date: March 2, 2015
Location: TN
Gender: Male
Default Re: War on #1A

I think Dave Rubin said it best. I can't remember the exact quote so I will paraphrase. If you are really for freedom, then you have to realize someone somewhere will think or speak things with which you disagree.

If you have an expectation that everyone should or must agree with you then you might as well just go ahead and live as a hermit because it is just never going to happen. So you should just remove yourself from society and stop bothering the rest of us.

Always up to chat. I like meeting new people and discussing anything from music to philosophy, sports to art.
trackinglife is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright©2000 - 2018
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2004 - 2018, VirtualTeen.org