• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Religions/cults that suppress free speech

Free speech doesn't increase ignoracy?

  • True

    Votes: 8 80.0%
  • Not true

    Votes: 2 20.0%

  • Total voters
    10

1213

Well-Known Member
Do you know a religion or cult that suppresses free speech?

If cult leader would say to you, "we reduce ignorance by not allowing all to speak", would you think it is reasonable or not?

I think limiting free speech increases ignorance, because then people will know less. Do you agree with this, or is there some good reason to think the opposite?
 

1213

Well-Known Member
Not the post, the poll question. :)
Ignoracy...

Ok, thanks, and sorry for the mistake, I can't change it anymore. Hopefully people understand this issue correctly. :)

The point is to ask, does freedom of speech increase ignorance, or not? And that could be continued with, If not, would it be good to have freedom of speech?
 

1213

Well-Known Member
What do you mean by "free speech"? What are it's limits? If none, then it includes gaslighting and propaganda.

I don’t think it can be called free, if there are limits. And I understand that if people are free to speak, it is possible that they say also say wrong things. However, I think bigger problem is, if wrong ideas can’t be heard, because then no one can correct them, explain why they are wrong. I think it is like sweeping trash under the carpet and hoping they will never be seen again. I think it only makes things worse, because then the wrong ideas spread “under the carpet” and can eventually cause even bigger mess, because no one could have corrected the bad ideas.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
The problem is a lot of people seem to think that free speech should include gossip, backbiting, or just lying out right.

But, don't you think it is good that the wrong ideas can be seen so that they can be corrected? For example, if someone lies, is it better that it is done in hidden, or so that people can see it and correct what is wrong with it?
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
I don’t think it can be called free, if there are limits. And I understand that if people are free to speak, it is possible that they say also say wrong things. However, I think bigger problem is, if wrong ideas can’t be heard, because then no one can correct them, explain why they are wrong. I think it is like sweeping trash under the carpet and hoping they will never be seen again. I think it only makes things worse, because then the wrong ideas spread “under the carpet” and can eventually cause even bigger mess, because no one could have corrected the bad ideas.

Look at what is going on with COVID and gaslighting and lying including promoting fake cures which is causing people's lives because they don't wear a mask and don't get vaccinated.

And we also are living in a time when foreign powers are creating propaganda to mislead and weaken the US.

Speech is a double-edged sword. I'm in favor of free speech but we need a better way of dealing with malign people and nations.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
Look at what is going on with COVID and gaslighting and lying including promoting fake cures which is causing people's lives because they don't wear a mask and don't get vaccinated.

And we also are living in a time when foreign powers are creating propaganda to mislead and weaken the US.

Speech is a double-edged sword. I'm in favor of free speech but we need a better way of dealing with malign people and nations.

Unfortunately, Covid is a subject that I can’t speak of. And this is not the thread for it anyway. But, generally speaking, I think it is more problematic when certain voices are suppressed, because then it is not possible to correct them.

If for example a foreign country would tell a lie, it would be good for you to know it, so that you could explain why it is wrong. Maybe the one making the claim would not change it, but if you have a good argument, many would see it in correct way, which could cause positive change and especially prevent things to escalate to worse.
 

Altfish

Veteran Member
Do you know a religion or cult that suppresses free speech?
Yes, many

If cult leader would say to you, "we reduce ignorance by not allowing all to speak", would you think it is reasonable or not?
No

I think limiting free speech increases ignorance, because then people will know less. Do you agree with this, or is there some good reason to think the opposite?
Agree
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Do you know a religion or cult that suppresses free speech?

If cult leader would say to you, "we reduce ignorance by not allowing all to speak", would you think it is reasonable or not?

I think limiting free speech increases ignorance, because then people will know less. Do you agree with this, or is there some good reason to think the opposite?

Sometimes,

Scientology was like this. The idea being those not trained or those without experience don't actually know what they are talking about.

Everyone has an opinion. Some with greater knowledge/experience, some with less.

Unfortunately people don't always listen to the person with the greater knowledge/experience. Sometimes folks listen to the person that more aligns with their world view or whatever other bias they might have. So an experienced speaker can have as likely a chance of leading folks down the wrong road as an experienced speaker has of leading them down the right one.

Since religion is mostly faith base, there is no way to test/verify that whoever is speaking is teaching correctly.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
...Unfortunately people don't always listen to the person with the greater knowledge/experience. Sometimes folks listen to the person that more aligns with their world view or whatever other bias they might have. So an experienced speaker can have as likely a chance of leading folks down the wrong road as an experienced speaker has of leading them down the right one.
...

I think that is an interesting point. And it can be difficult to know, who has the correct view and argument, especially for those who have not studied much. What do you think is the correct way to see who has the right opinion, or view, or argument?
 

Quagmire

Imaginary talking monkey
Staff member
Premium Member
But, don't you think it is good that the wrong ideas can be seen so that they can be corrected? For example, if someone lies, is it better that it is done in hidden, or so that people can see it and correct what is wrong with it?

That doesn't mean that once its exposed a lie should be tolerated or allowed, which is really what we're talking about here.

We take down misinformation about covid (since that's also what we're really talking about here) as soon as we spot it.

That way when somebody posts something recommending people start taking horse medicine, which has actually happened here long before it ever became an internet craze, hopefully we can take that down before someone actually gives it a try.

Or put it another way: rights come with responsibilities. As far as I'm concerned if you're going to waive one you're not entitled to the other.
 
Last edited:

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Freedom of Speech is a political right in the US. That means that the government cannot arrest a person just for espousing a specific belief. That does not mean that one is not exempt from repercussions from that speech.

For example a person could publicly support something as hateful as going back to slavery or even worse. They have that "right". But it does not mean that a business could not fire that person from his or her job for making it publicly known that the person supports those ideas. A news company would be harmed if their lead anchor turned out to be a member of the Ku Klux Klan. Since their political actions would harm them they do have the right to fire people for making such public statements.

I might have been in trouble here once or twice. Maybe. I have never used the "free speech" argument in my defense. I know how well that brick balloon would fly.
 
Top