Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 Posted:   Sep 28, 2023 - 5:53 PM   
 By:   Solium   (Member)

Free speech is important, but it should never be confused with some sort of God-given right.


That's exactly what the framers of the U.S. Declaration of Independence and Constitution felt about free speech--that it was a God-given right that no government created by men had the right to infringe upon.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

One of the cornerstones of "Liberty" is the right of free speech, which is why the drafters of the Constitution included free speech in the first of that document's "Bill of Rights": "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech..."


They kinda blew it with the "all men" part.

 
 Posted:   Sep 28, 2023 - 6:08 PM   
 By:   Solium   (Member)

Just to clarify the founding fathers knew the threat of being prosecuted by the state for speaking out or challenging the state. Freedom to challenge the state, its leaders and opposition without fear of jail, torture or death were the primary reason behind it.

 
 Posted:   Sep 28, 2023 - 6:51 PM   
 By:   nuts_score   (Member)

I had a peculiar thought about freedom of speech being a so-called "God-given right." If it was, why do the ten biblical principles largely deny it? Why, historically, has thought or word against the Abrahamic God been considered blasphemous, criminal, or simply immoral? Doesn't seem to be much freedom at all in that regard.

Food for my thoughts, at the very least.

 
 Posted:   Sep 28, 2023 - 6:57 PM   
 By:   Solium   (Member)

I had a peculiar thought about freedom of speech being a so-called "God-given right." If it was, why do the ten biblical principles largely deny it? Why, historically, has thought or word against the Abrahamic God been considered blasphemous, criminal, or simply immoral? Doesn't seem to be much freedom at all in that regard.

Food for my thoughts, at the very least.


Because religion is authoritarian. The Constitution and Bill Of Rights have nothing to do with religion of any kind!

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 28, 2023 - 9:22 PM   
 By:   Bob DiMucci   (Member)

Because religion is authoritarian. The Constitution and Bill Of Rights have nothing to do with religion of any kind!


Other than allowing everyone to worship according to the religion of their choice...even an authoritarian one.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 28, 2023 - 9:24 PM   
 By:   Bob DiMucci   (Member)

They kinda blew it with the "all men" part.


And we've been paying for it ever since. But where would we be if they had started with language less inclusive?

 
 Posted:   Sep 28, 2023 - 11:48 PM   
 By:   Nicolai P. Zwar   (Member)

So defamation or conspiring to commit a crime, which require speech, are not prosecutable?

With "free speech" is meant "freedom of expression". Of course it is illegal to defame someone, to yell "fire" in a crowded theater, or to threaten someone or to commit crimes. "Free speech" never meant that crimes and the instigation to crimes cannot be persecuted.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2023 - 2:25 AM   
 By:   Hurdy Gurdy   (Member)

https://news.sky.com/story/laurence-fox-apologises-to-ava-evans-over-comments-on-gb-news-12971909

Well, well.
After categorically stating that he WOULD NOT EVER apologise to The Mob, that sly old Fox has completed a U-turn and done just that.
I guess he doesn't REALLY mean what he says roll eyes

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2023 - 3:45 AM   
 By:   Rick15   (Member)

Freedom (of speech) isn’t free
It costs folks like you and me
And if we don't all chip in
We'll never pay that bill

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2023 - 4:06 AM   
 By:   Hurdy Gurdy   (Member)

Haha!
Nice one Rick (derpa derp).

 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2023 - 4:20 AM   
 By:   Solium   (Member)

Because religion is authoritarian. The Constitution and Bill Of Rights have nothing to do with religion of any kind!


Other than allowing everyone to worship according to the religion of their choice...even an authoritarian one.


And freedom from religion and religious prosecution.

 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2023 - 5:14 AM   
 By:   Nicolai P. Zwar   (Member)

Because religion is authoritarian. The Constitution and Bill Of Rights have nothing to do with religion of any kind!


Other than allowing everyone to worship according to the religion of their choice...even an authoritarian one.


And freedom from religion and religious prosecution.


Yes, I thoroughly believe these are all very, very important rights, rights that we sometimes take to easily for granted, when for the majority of people across time and space (as in other countries), such rights just did not exist. I believe everybody should be able to believe (and freely express the belief) in their religion of choice (which of course includes no particular religion at all). I am a steadfast proponent of both freedom of speech and freedom of (and of course from) religion, but for obvious reasons, this board is not the most suitable to discuss these subject matters, since they are "politics" and "religion". (Subjects I personally certainly don't mind discussing in appropriate contexts and never did, but these seem to have led to acrimony in the past on this board, as they often do on any discussion forum.)

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2023 - 5:27 AM   
 By:   Ado   (Member)

The intermixing of supposed 'rights' and nations and 'freedoms' with religion will be the eventual undoing, of at least the US. God did not create the US, or bless it especially, or make us have a better nation, or 'give' us more freedoms, or the right to say anything, or own anything like a gun. The association of these things with 'god' is toxic, and artificial, and wrong. And yes, I am talking about my own mother.

 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2023 - 6:10 AM   
 By:   DavidCorkum   (Member)

The freedom to think and speak as you like is a given. But I don't understand why the concept of "truth" isn't protected. Knowingly lying for profit, exploitation or to cause harm to others should be a chargeable crime. Any public statement should have to be verifiable by law for the protection of the public. It shouldn't require lawsuits, it should be necessary up front. Of course, that would devastate the advertising industry and politics.

 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2023 - 6:13 AM   
 By:   Solium   (Member)

The freedom to think and speak as you like is a given. But I don't understand why the concept of "truth" isn't protected. Knowingly lying for profit, exploitation or to cause harm to others should be a chargeable crime. Any public statement should have to be verifiable by law for the protection of the public. It shouldn't require lawsuits, it should be necessary up front. Of course, that would devastate the advertising industry and politics.

Agreed, which is why there are laws against false advertising though it’s so loosely upheld.

 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2023 - 7:31 AM   
 By:   Nicolai P. Zwar   (Member)

The freedom to think and speak as you like is a given. But I don't understand why the concept of "truth" isn't protected. Knowingly lying for profit, exploitation or to cause harm to others should be a chargeable crime.

And it is. There are many instances where lying (regardless whether for profit or other reasons) is prohibited by law.


Any public statement should have to be verifiable by law for the protection of the public. It shouldn't require lawsuits, it should be necessary up front. Of course, that would devastate the advertising industry and politics.


The difficulty with that is that there are many statements you cannot "verify". Many statements are a mixture of opinion, facts, perceived facts, and conclusions. The only "verifiable" statements would be fact statements (and even there you will encounter lots of tricky ground), any form of conclusion is already open to debate. But the key issue is, you would need an ultimate arbiter of who decides what "truth" is, and laws to protect freedom of speech and freedom of religion have been implemented precisely to prevent the Installation of such an ultimate arbiter.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2023 - 7:48 AM   
 By:   Howard L   (Member)

The other day I caught a snippet of Blackboard Jungle on a cable channel. It was the scene when the Puerto Rican kid talked into the tape recorder. The bully calls him a spic, he calls the bully a mick, and then the teacher uses the moment to segue into a wonderful classroom discussion on dangerous insults. When he introduces the N word it was blipped out, as if he uttered an obscenity. It threw me having seen this movie numerous times since I was a kid. That was the lingo back in the day and while I have no problem with the word treated as an obscenity today I hate blanket censorship devoid of context. Glad that TCM and others treat older films as the instructive museum pieces they are.

 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2023 - 8:11 AM   
 By:   Solium   (Member)

The freedom to think and speak as you like is a given. But I don't understand why the concept of "truth" isn't protected. Knowingly lying for profit, exploitation or to cause harm to others should be a chargeable crime.

And it is. There are many instances where lying (regardless whether for profit or other reasons) is prohibited by law.


Any public statement should have to be verifiable by law for the protection of the public. It shouldn't require lawsuits, it should be necessary up front. Of course, that would devastate the advertising industry and politics.


The difficulty with that is that there are many statements you cannot "verify". Many statements are a mixture of opinion, facts, perceived facts, and conclusions. The only "verifiable" statements would be fact statements (and even there you will encounter lots of tricky ground), any form of conclusion is already open to debate. But the key issue is, you would need an ultimate arbiter of who decides what "truth" is, and laws to protect freedom of speech and freedom of religion have been implemented precisely to prevent the Installation of such an ultimate arbiter.


People make mistakes but it’s often apparent when someone is making a false statement on purpose or by omission. I do think advertisers and politicians should be held to account.

It’s funny because it’s against the law for a citizen to knowingly lie to the state but the state can lie to the people.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2023 - 8:18 AM   
 By:   Hurdy Gurdy   (Member)

With the internet and social media, your right to Free Speech and Self Expression has never been so prevalent.

But, with GREAT POWER, comes GREAT RESPONSIBILITY wink

The possibility of you being taken apart or cancelled, based on your rhetoric, is just as powerful, as Mr Fox has learned, at his cost.

 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2023 - 8:40 AM   
 By:   Solium   (Member)

I just want freedom from cats like the Mousekewitz‘s.

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2024 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.
Website maintained and powered by Veraprise and Matrimont.