Posts Tagged ‘Speech’

I have got this from a friend and asking for wider opinion. Why do we need to pay the phone bills when constitution guarantees Free speech. We may be charged for overseas, but not internally. A relevant quota may be applied beyond which Internal calls should also be charged, but basic system should be free.

In other words, lets say I printed a news article calling you a Nazi and saying that your views were comparable to Nazi policies. Isn’t that considered libel and defamatory?

So then, why is it considered free speech to do the same thing to political figures?

Why do governments around the world, in particular the former Soviet Union in the past recognize free speech to be more dangerous than guns, bombs and terrorism?

Best answer will cite original and primary sources of the idea of free speech.

What is free speech NOT?

Does the West presently have free speech, whatever it is?

How does one get free speech? Or is one born with it?

Peace! =D
@ Rowlfe, thankyou! I will check those out. I am seeking the first formulation of the principle of free speech.

Schumer, Pelosi, Reed and others are promising a fairness doctrine in February. Obama will have to sign it.

What’s more important: Free speech or government controlled fairness of ideas?

Sorry if that’s worded badly, I mean like what did the common person think of the Free Speech Movements at Berkeley? Any information helps and thanks in advance!

Where I can download the free speech to text freeware for windows 7? I do not want those text to speech sofware. Thanks.

I see people post on free speech often and many times they seem to be saying that they do not believe free speech should be protected for certain groups or certain people. As an example I will use radio pundits like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. I do not necessarily agree or disagree with these people, they are just the best polarizing figures I can think of at this time. I see many people post that these people should be censored or removed from the radio.

My question is this. Is it not more important to protect the rights of people who you don’t agree with than those you do based on the idea that if you are not willing to protect the rights of those you dissent against then the freedom itself is in jeopardy as a whole?
Az Grande: Only if they are somehow trying to specifically silence that opinion. To express a counter opinion to opinions expressed is what free speech is all about. We do not have to agree with each others opinions, but we should respect the right to hold and express them.
Az Grande: Yes and those who don’t agree with people like Limbaugh label that opinion as hate speech, racism and use a number of derrogatory terms to describe those people who choose to listen. I hate to tell you, but it is no different. Having free speech does not mean you can speak freely without challenge from other sources. You are trying to make an apples and oranges comparison here. In short saying you should be allowed to say what you want without redress, while those who disagree with you should not because by stating their opinion they are somehow limiting your opinion from being heard. My point is that both sides have equal rights to express their opinions whetehr I agree with them or not. If we do not uphold that right in the end no one will enjoy free speech. As for limiting freedom of assembly, I don’t agree with that practice either, but that’s another discussion entirely.

There has to be a line drawn somewhere between tormenting people and free speech. Where is that line?

Westboro Church in news again. Lawsuit by father of son who was being buried while they protested with signs that read “Thank God for dead soldiers”. Father sued them they have won so far for free speech.

I’m writing a paper on the subject of the history of free speech in America, and was wanting to find out some ideas. Anybody know this or know where I can look?
Max, do you know if they can go out of uniform?