Free speech - front lines in Australia - [personal at bernardgaynor.com.au: Update: battle for free speech]

[Mirimir]

On 09/12/2016 12:23 AM, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
> On 9/11/16 10:59 PM, Nadine Earnshaw wrote:
>>
>>
>> "True free speech demands that you allow horrible small minded idiots the right to say vile things in public so that all unpopular
>> but valid opinions can be debated and society can grow." 
>>
>> No I don't agree with you. Sorry but you dont get to define what free speech is.
> 
> It is already well defined and extremely well argued:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions
> http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/what-does

Speech in the US isn't free, either.

But speech on a well-secured Tor onion site is arguably very close to
free. That's very cool :)

> A reasonable history of free speech:
> https://www.theguardian.com/media/2006/feb/05/religion.news
> 
>>
>> In 18c we arent talking about what is unpopular but what is public vilification. There is a difference between debate and personal
>> attacks.
>> Personal attacks whether physical or verbal are not acceptable and are criminal in civilized society.
> 
> How would you know whether people have outgrown their prejudices if it is illegal for them to illustrate them?  You would rather
> that they stew and scheme (in the American meaning) in private?
> 
>>
>> Free speech like guns can hurt when in the wrong hands, it is not something that hatefull fwits can hide behind.
> 
> Some hurts should be confronted rather than outlawed.
> 
> 
> sdw
> 
>