Donate SIGN UP

Free Speech Deemed Contentious.

Avatar Image
Theland | 16:42 Fri 20th Mar 2020 | Society & Culture
209 Answers
Our tradition of free speech is threatened by a growing trend find within it reasons to be offended where no offence was ever intended.
Such offence is manufactured, and validated by a subjective redefinition of meaning.
Surely this trend has its roots in post modernism and relativism, where any word or phrase can be deemed to be offensive when no offence was ever intended.
Will this idea ever be challenged successfully to reinstate the value and protection of free speech as it has always be understood?


1 to 20 of 209rss feed

1 2 3 4 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Theland. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It goes beyond speech IMHO, and covers the growing emphasis on Rights. This is a man-made concept and is all very fine but it should be matched with a similar emphasis on Responsibilities. It's the imbalance which causes the problems. Anyone for a Human Responsibilities Act ?
Well, Theland, if the idea or concept is challenged, a stringently enforced efficacious system of quality-control measures must first be in place in order to vet those challenges.
Agreed. Everything is 'contentious' unless we all agree on everything.
How can it be against Site Rules.
come on then, lets see an example
"where no offence was ever intended."

Sorry to have to coin the phrase... "Purleeeese"
Question Author
Example - Doctor sacked by his health authority for refusing to call a man a woman.
Question Author
The man / woman deemed that offence had been caused.
I guess we'll take your word for it and that it's as simple as you put it.
Contentious by my understanding regarding the Site Rules would be "given to provoking argument".
not relevant. free speech as an individual is always modified by employers rerquirements.
This Doctor stood his ground as is his right, however it went against the guidelines of his position.

No one has deprived his of his right to call people what he wants, in his own time.
hurrah for free speech !

but should it ALL be free - should we be free to say that Michael Jackson was NOT a child molester and that Trump framed him because he is a racist ?

or that anti-vaxxers on this thread and elsewhere are in fact baby killers see what they did on Samoa
who has today just closed its border - showing people DO learn from expeerience - the experience here is 150 unnecessary and avoidable baby deaths

there must a limit somewhere - even the land of the Free has a somewhat weak libel law

Human responsibilities act
read the rest of the statute book - full of duties
BECAUSE - for every right created there is a related duty
( HOhfeld analysis here)

well you did ask

some of my replies cause people to want to gnaw their limbs off they aver
well get chewing is all I can say !
Question Author
Mamya - Jordan Peterson, famous Canadian psychologist had an identical dispute when Trudeaus government wanted to introduce compelled speech.
This is a very dangerous first step in negating the precious gift of freedom of speech and something that should be opposed in all its forms wherever it is found.
The doctor lost his job, so everybody else should have stood with him in solidarity and resistance to the encroaching fascism.
Question Author
"First they came ......... "
The trouble with a complete freedom of speech without any constraints is that all the nasty vicious people will say the most revoltingly foul things and there will be nothing anyone can do about it. Times and attitudes change as time moves on and I am delighted that the repulsive racist,sexist foulness , for examples is no longer acceptable and can be punished within the boundaries of the law. As we live we have to learn.
//so everybody else should have stood with him in solidarity and resistance to the encroaching fascism.//

They didn't, hence you should be addressing his colleagues - not me, I only posted the link.
"Our tradition of free speech"

Where does this nonsensical notion come from? We have NEVER had a tradition of free speech in this country:
Question Author
Mamya - And I sincerely thank you for the link. X
Theland in his own time he can say what he likes. In his employers time he can accept the limitations the employer places on him or he can leave. My Hermes delivery driver can't swear at me while he is working. When I worked in the NHS I had to treat fox hunting patients and keep my lip buttoned when they talked about it.
All the Silicon Valley internet companies have made a joint statement.
Because of the virus, the algorithms will be removing people.......
whether they've breached Site Rules or not.

1 to 20 of 209rss feed

1 2 3 4 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Free Speech Deemed Contentious.

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.