SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the our-precious-little-snowflakes dept.
Turns out all of you who thought millennials were fascist little turds were 40% correct.
American Millennials are far more likely than older generations to say the government should be able to prevent people from saying offensive statements about minority groups, according to a new analysis of Pew Research Center survey data on free speech and media across the globe.
We asked whether people believe that citizens should be able to make public statements that are offensive to minority groups, or whether the government should be able to prevent people from saying these things. Four-in-ten Millennials say the government should be able to prevent people publicly making statements that are offensive to minority groups, while 58% said such speech is OK.
And this is why you should not be allowed to vote until you're mature enough to consider the consequences of your actions.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Monday November 23 2015, @05:30PM
You can do real damage to someone through slander.
The speech itself is not harmful; other people's actions after hearing it may be, however.
Would you want to protect the rights of individuals to falsely yell fire in a crowded movie theatre? Or to make false statement about their product?
Yes [soylentnews.org], and yes. I would especially like to see people stop using that first analogy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 25 2015, @12:15AM
Of course it is.
You're probably one of those people who also believes that guns don't kill people, people do. Let me clear this one up, they both don't, it's the bullets that do. No seriously.
What if I command my German Sheperds to bring you to me? You want to blame the dogs for hurting you? That's just as silly. People who speak to hurt others are responsible. They are free to speak, but they are not free of responsibility for their actions.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Wednesday November 25 2015, @05:24AM
You're probably one of those people who also believes that guns don't kill people, people do. Let me clear this one up, they both don't, it's the bullets that do. No seriously.
Maybe, but you could go farther than that, couldn't you?
What if I command my German Sheperds to bring you to me? You want to blame the dogs for hurting you?
Yes, unless you could somehow classify them as tools similar to a gun for this purpose.
People who speak to hurt others are responsible.
People who speak to hurt others are ineffective. It's always someone or something else that inflicts the actual harm, whether they are using tools or not.
They are free to speak, but they are not free of responsibility for their actions.
Okay, now regardless of whether or not you agree with my positions on free speech, this is complete bullshit. Freedom of speech means the ability to speak freely and not be punished by the government. If you are punished by the government for particular speech, you don't have free speech in that instance. Otherwise, what would the purpose of freedom of speech be? Using that logic, you could say that people in North Korea have just as much freedom of speech as people in the US.
So no, they are not free to speak in those cases. They merely have the ability to speak, which is different.