• 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!

In Defense of Insulting People and Ideas...

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
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.

I don't think the fact that not everyone has the same access to free speech will be rectified by placing limits on speech. For one thing, doing so risks undermining democracy -- or what's left of it these days. Free speech is a cornerstone liberty. Most other liberties ultimately depend on it.
 

Horrorble

Well-Known Member
I don't think the fact that not everyone has the same access to free speech will be rectified by placing limits on speech. For one thing, doing so risks undermining democracy -- or what's left of it these days. Free speech is a cornerstone liberty. Most other liberties ultimately depend on it.

I wasn't suggesting to place limits on speech, although we do that anyway with some hate speech. I was just kind of challenging the whole concept of "FREE" speech which in my opinion the "free" isn't free for everybody or in the same way. What if the conditions of your oppression means you have limited speech or you can't speak in a way because human dignity isn't granted to one class as it is for another? It means free speech is dominated by certain groups of people which is dangerous for the people who are subordinate under their speech.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
I wasn't suggesting to place limits on speech, although we do that anyway with some hate speech. I was just kind of challenging the whole concept of "FREE" speech which in my opinion the "free" isn't free for everybody or in the same way. What if the conditions of your oppression means you have limited speech or you can't speak in a way because human dignity isn't granted to one class as it is for another? It means free speech is dominated by certain groups of people which is dangerous for the people who are subordinate under their speech.

Thanks for the clarification. That would actually make a good thread all by itself.
 

Horrorble

Well-Known Member
Thanks for the clarification. That would actually make a good thread all by itself.
Also there is the power of naming. But you're right it can be a thread in itself. For me "insult" is irrelevant whether you think you should be allowed to insult or not. What's relevant for me is how "free speech" affects people lives when exercised.
 
Top