Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Freedom of Speech - A slight tangent on the Vile Rhetoric

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
JustFiveMoreMinutes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 05:49 PM
Original message
Freedom of Speech - A slight tangent on the Vile Rhetoric
Okay,

We have Freedom of Speech! YAY!

I personally dislike it is synonymous with choice of expression (I don't like you! = You're a goddamned motherfucking cocksucker ass sucker')

But Freedom of Speech is NOT OPEN to any/all speech (we usually say can't shout FIRE! in a theater)

Limits freely placed on Freedom of Speech:

*Libel/Slander
*Inciting a riot
*Obstruction of Justice
*Perjury
*Committing Fraud

and then business related add-ons like bashsing your boss/company on a social medium.

That's my quick list.

Others?

(Just trying to counter some 'oh yeah, well I have FREEDOM of Speech'.. and I want to say 'yes, but...'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Drale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
1. Lying needs to be added to that list
it would probably kill the repuke party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustFiveMoreMinutes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I think lying without benefit or gain is protected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Davis_X_Machina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. No fraud or perjury, or false statements under oath
Edited on Mon Jan-10-11 06:10 PM by Davis_X_Machina
...generally, then no problem.

If lying were a crime, there'd not be a husband in America not in the joint.

And incitement to riot only if limited, extremely limited, as per Brandenburg v. Ohio. Incitement statutes were used routinely to cripple both the anti-war movement and the civil rights movement.

Freedom isn't free, as some folks on the other side are fond of constantly reminding us, and life in a small-d democracy isn't going to be completely peaceful, or completely risk-free, ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Drale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Ok let me rephrase
Lying in the political arena or better yet, how about politicians are seen as always under oath?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Davis_X_Machina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. What is the 'political arena'?
How do you give such a term legal meaning? Who prosecutes? Who has the power to initiate a prosecution?

We've got people on these boards who, e.g. under this law, would have removed Obama from office a year ago, over some interpretations of statements he made re supporting the public option.

There's a ballot box. Works at least as fast as the law, and is fairer to boot. The people are prosecutor judge and jury then.

For a place named 'Democratic Underground;, there's precious little faith or belief in small-d democracy to be found here sometimes.

If the laws we have now are enough to save us, none ever will be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustFiveMoreMinutes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. How can you tell when a politician or lawyer is lying?
Their lips are moving.

Sigh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Davis_X_Machina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-10-11 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. I expect them to lie.
Everyone expects them to lie. And has, for millenia. They don't want honest, they want effective. Not since ancient Athens, and the days of Aristides the Just.

It is said that, on this occasion, (a balloting for ostracism) an illiterate voter, who did not know Aristides, came up to him, and giving him his voting potsherd, desired him to write upon it the name of Aristides. The latter asked if Aristides had wronged him. "No," was the reply, "I do not even know him, but it irritates me to hear him everywhere called 'the Just'."
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 02:16 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC