In Defense of Insulting People and Ideas...

lewisnotmiller · Jan 19, 2015

icehorse said:
Smegol,

Are you saying that Australia makes it illegal to criticize Islam (and other religions too)? wow!

No...not that im aware of. We dont have blasphemy laws, although there are hate speech laws.

Overall i would think we're similar to England. Religious groups do get some weird exemptions from equal opportunity laws, so definitely some crap in our laws that needs to be cleared up.

Smegol · Jan 19, 2015

That is exactly what I am saying
We do have laws that restrict us from offending any religion in public
It's the recently introduced section 18c of the discrimination act

Smegol · Jan 20, 2015

the most restrictive of these types of laws is in the state of Victoria (and other states) where it is a criminal offence to publicly offend based on religion

Abbott is now trying to have the word offend taken out of the 18c

Legal experts have warned that the federal discrimination legislation, although it doesn't specifically mention religion (unlike vic and othe state law) it would be specific to say Muslims, Jews and Christians etc not islam, Judaism or Christianity

lewisnotmiller · Jan 20, 2015

Smegol said:
That is exactly what I am saying
We do have laws that restrict us from offending any religion in public
It's the recently introduced section 18c of the discrimination act

Ah...18c.
An odious little piece of legislature. Its not new though, and it doesn't mention religion at all, but is instead focused on race and culture.

Good point, though...that does seem to put the ability to define what is an insult squarely in the 'victims' shoulders. Also, for many, there is an intrinsic link between culture and religion. I suspect it means I'm **** outta luck if someone abuses me for being an atheist (which would be unusual here, I admit), but not like I'd sue over that anyway.

lewisnotmiller · Jan 20, 2015

Smegol said:
the most restrictive of these types of laws is in the state of Victoria (and other states) where it is a criminal offence to publicly offend based on religion

Do you have a source for that?

Smegol said:
Abbott is now trying to have the word offend taken out of the 18c

No...he was trying. He backed away due to lack of support.

icehorse · Jan 20, 2015

Hi Smegol and lewis:

This Australian discussion is very interesting to me. I'm a free speech absolutist, and I'm always concerned with even small erosions to free speech.

Sunstone · Jan 20, 2015

icehorse said:
I'm a free speech absolutist, and I'm always concerned with even small erosions to free speech.

Are there any limits at all to free speech that you see as legitimate? Such as yelling fire in a crowded theater when there's no fire, to use a classic example?

icehorse · Jan 20, 2015

Sunstone said:
Are there any limits at all to free speech that you see as legitimate? Such as yelling fire in a crowded theater when there's no fire, to use a classic example?

In the states and in other "free speech" countries some limits already exist - such as the yelling fire example. We shouldn't add any new limits, and it's possible we should review some of the existing limits.

BTW, the "shouting fire" example is actually an historically horrible example, as the judge used this example to strike down some very legitimate free speech that had nothing to do with immediate bodily threat.

lewisnotmiller · Jan 20, 2015

icehorse said:
In the states and in other "free speech" countries some limits already exist - such as the yelling fire example. We shouldn't add any new limits, and it's possible we should review some of the existing limits.

The problem is that repealling 18c seems unpopular. People think these sort of restrictions protect them. They dont seem to consider the cost (commonly).

So, in a democratic society, where there isnt a simple and overwhelming constitutional issue that strikes such a law as unconstitutional, it can be hard to reduce or remove such 'protections'.

Far as i know, only political free speech is explicitly protected.

lewisnotmiller · Jan 20, 2015

Avi1001 said:
Great OP, Phil...this is precisely the approach used to drive me from the Judaism DIR...what a shame...!!!!

Thats not really the same thing at all...

Avi1001 · Jan 21, 2015

lewisnotmiller said:
Thats not really the same thing at all...

....the classic response to the OP......

lewisnotmiller · Jan 21, 2015

Avi1001 said:
....the classic response to the OP......

You mean the OP that I was the first one to post in support of? That OP?
I'm not the one trying to equate non-posting in an RF forum with higher ideologies of free speech, but whatever. If you'd like to show cause, go for it. In my opinion, your non-posting in a DIR on RF has nothing to do with the OP.

Avi1001 · Jan 21, 2015

lewisnotmiller said:
You mean the OP that I was the first one to post in support of? That OP?
I'm not the one trying to equate non-posting in an RF forum with higher ideologies of free speech, but whatever. If you'd like to show cause, go for it. In my opinion, your non-posting in a DIR on RF has nothing to do with the OP.

Thank you for being the judge of my situation...!!!!

lewisnotmiller · Jan 21, 2015

Avi1001 said:
Thank you for being the judge of my situation...!!!!

No probs. Feel free to judge and/or comment on my opinion if you like. It's kinda the point of the site.

Revasser · Jan 23, 2015

This entire thread is insulting to me.

Also, you're all doodoo heads and dodo birds.

icehorse · Jan 24, 2015

Revasser said:
This entire thread is insulting to me.

Also, you're all doodoo heads and dodo birds.

You're being debate-aphobic!

Maldini · Jan 24, 2015

Robert.Evans said:
I'm sure Romania and Russia are now loved for being free of atheist ''nuts'' etc etc.

The classic mistake of branding atheism as a religion. I'm an atheist and I'm in no way, shape or form assosicated with non-religious people who ruled in Russia or Romania. It's one of the weakest and probably the most irritating defense proposed by the religious.

rosends · Feb 15, 2015

an interesting collection of quotes cited here
How the UN’s highest officials demonized cartoonists « View from Geneva

Horrorble · Feb 15, 2015

Sunstone said:
It seems to me that censorship is one of the most common and dangerous ways in which governments and other institutions repress humans. It is dangerous not only because it can prevent people from finding out the truth, but also because freedom of speech and press are cornerstone freedoms: Other freedoms are meaningless without them. For instance, freedom of religion, without freedom of speech, is virtually a hollow and meaningless farce.

So far as I can see, one of the key ways in which anti-social politicians, pundits, and preachers attack freedom of speech is to say it is justified when someone's speech offends or insults others.

As it happens, that's pure BS.

It's BS because, among other reasons, there will always be someone who is insulted by anyone or anything that disagrees with him or her. Often enough, that person will not say, "I am insulted because you have told me something I disagree with." They will lie and say instead, "You said something just to insult me."

Again, it is BS to attack free speech on the basis of whether or not it insults anyone because we are a species that all too often finds the truth insulting. In fact, though it is common to claim to be insulted by lies, we tend to be insulted at least as often by truths. Thus to attack free speech on the basis of whether it insults people is, in effect, to promote the suppression of the truth.

For those and other reasons, we should drop this nonsense about free speech ending where insults begin. That is so childish and thin-skinned. A free humanity is not possible with such views.

There are different thoughts circulating in my mind about free speech that I'm finding hard to articulate. Do you think that the fact that not everyone has the same equal access to free speech and we aren't all equally heard, that privilege does play a part in granting coverage to certain view points over others? What I'm thinking here is that sex, race, sexual orientation, class etc, plays a part in how free speech operates in reality and the dangers that come with that.

fantome profane · Feb 15, 2015

Horrorble said:
There are different thoughts circulating in my mind about free speech that I'm finding hard to articulate. Do you think that the fact that not everyone has the same equal access to free speech and we aren't all equally heard, that privilege does play a part in granting coverage to certain view points over others? What I'm thinking here is that sex, race, sexual orientation, class etc, plays a part in how free speech operates in reality and the dangers that come with that.

This is true, but it there is more equality in speech today then there has ever been in any other time in history.

In Defense of Insulting People and Ideas...

Grand Hat

New Member

New Member

Grand Hat

Grand Hat

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist

De Diablo Del Fora

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist

Grand Hat

Grand Hat

reform Jew humanist liberal feminist entrepreneur

Grand Hat

reform Jew humanist liberal feminist entrepreneur

Grand Hat

Terrible Dancer

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice