On Freedom of Speech, Rush and the Turkish viewpoint

[Doktor Howl]

The fact that the ignore feature isn't available to admins sometimes makes me hate America.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

If Rush can't say idiotic fucked-up things in public, then what safeties would exist to prevent someone small and without power or vast money reserves from telling the truth about corporate corruption in public?

Please tell me you see that flaw in limiting freedom of expression.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Calling someone a 'slut' based on the information available was an opinion? Did Rush have any idea how many sexual partners she had,or how many times she had sex? For all we know, she may only have been with one guy, ever.

If he said she was immoral (sex before marriage) or a fornicator, OK... valid opinions... but a slut? I understand the philosophy of free speech, I defend it often... but I find this quandary interesting.

I have begun to question my long held belief (damn beliefs!) that all speech must be protected for free speech to be protected. Here in Turkey, though, it seems like they have proven my belief may not be 100% True. There's a lot of freedom of speech. You can protest the president, but you can't say he's a secret Christian bent on destroying the Turkish way of life. It forces the protest/disagreement/Op-ed whatever to deal with substance, rather than relying on baseless rhetoric.

Of course, maybe it wouldn't work in the US. Overall, most Turks I've met tend to be respectful in daily life. Of course, their culture is a lot older, so maybe its the difference between the middle aged society and the teenage society that still thinks spitballs are cool.

Either way, I'm sure its just a mental exercise... Americans will fight to the death to defend their freedom of verbal abuse and AK-47's 

As for the 'fire' comment... I think it depends on how you see psychological abuse. If physical abuse of your wife and psychological abuse of your wife are both domestic abuse. Is physically risking harm to the public all that different that psychologically risking harm to the public?

If bullying in schools includes verbal/psychological bullying... was what Rush did all that different?

If this girl already had some psychological condition and thinking that millions of people believed she was a slut sent her over the edge... would her suicide change Free Speech into 'Fire'?

I don't know the answers.

Nigel, I do understand the flaw... but honestly, an individual telling the truth about corporate corruption doesn't need to call the CEO a slut, or claim that they might secretly be an illegal alien. Wikileaks, for example, didn't resort to baseless lies and psychological bullying... they just told the facts. Yet, this unfettered free speech doesn't seem to be protecting them as much as its protecting Rush.

I see the flaws, but I'm suddenly seeing flaws on the other side as well, thats all.

[Doktor Howl]

So now it's not just the hyper-right that can't abide freedom of speech in all its messy glory.

I'm walking away from this discussion, for a short period of mourning.

Will return later.

[Scribbly]

What I find more interesting in freedom of speech is where it should apply, rather than what it should apply to.

By that I mean geographical space. Should protesters be allowed to shove dead fetus pictures in the faces of women on the way to the abortion clinic? Should people be able to campaign against gay marriage outside churches that allow it? Is that any different to 'Occupy'?

I accept people should be able to say whatever they want when you have to choose to listen to them, I find it a lot more difficult to accept that all viewpoints need to be capable of being inflicted on people all the time, which is another unspoken assumption in a lot of freedom of speech arguments I've had.

But that way lays Designated Free Speech Zones. It is still very tricky to navigate.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

So now it's not just the hyper-right that can't abide freedom of speech in all its messy glory.

I'm walking away from this discussion, for a short period of mourning.

Will return later.

Is Freedom of Speech a topic we can't discuss freely? I'm not against, I just find this different view very interesting. It seems less black and white to me than it used to.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

What Rush did was wrong, and he deserves public censure and censure from his employer.

He deserves a libel lawsuit from the woman in question.

Those are the only safeguards that are needed, and they already exist.

Who do you think would benefit from restrictions on free speech? It sure as hell wouldn't be the little people with no money.

[Oysters Rockefeller]

BSR isn't, from what I can see, advocating the end of free speech. He is just acknowledging that both systems are flawed, which some posters who are argueing have ALSO acknowledged.

Anyone who doesn't see how free speech can get messy might not be looking. It is still a right worth protecting, but bringing up the topic doesn't constitute a disagreement on if we should have free speech or not.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

So now it's not just the hyper-right that can't abide freedom of speech in all its messy glory.

I'm walking away from this discussion, for a short period of mourning.

Will return later.

Is Freedom of Speech a topic we can't discuss freely? I'm not against, I just find this different view very interesting. It seems less black and white to me than it used to.

Sure it is. Dok also has the freedom to step out of the conversation if he chooses.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

So now it's not just the hyper-right that can't abide freedom of speech in all its messy glory.

I'm walking away from this discussion, for a short period of mourning.

Will return later.

Is Freedom of Speech a topic we can't discuss freely? I'm not against, I just find this different view very interesting. It seems less black and white to me than it used to.

Sure it is. Dok also has the freedom to step out of the conversation if he chooses.

NO HE HAS TO STAY

OTHERWISE HE'S INFRINGING ON MY FREE SPEECH

SOMEHOW

[Nephew Twiddleton]

So now it's not just the hyper-right that can't abide freedom of speech in all its messy glory.

I'm walking away from this discussion, for a short period of mourning.

Will return later.

Is Freedom of Speech a topic we can't discuss freely? I'm not against, I just find this different view very interesting. It seems less black and white to me than it used to.

Sure it is. Dok also has the freedom to step out of the conversation if he chooses.

NO HE HAS TO STAY

OTHERWISE HE'S INFRINGING ON MY FREE SPEECH

SOMEHOW

I think I understand what Rat was trying to say, but the phrasing made it funny. "Do we have the freedom to speak about the freedom of speech?"

[kingyak]

The problem with Limbaugh's statements isn't that he's legally allowed to say what he says, it's that political discourse in this country has sunk so low that people will listen to what he says. If Americans were actually concerned with political debate rather than left-right tribalism, Rush would be back on unemployment.

[Cain]

I want to talk about freedom of speech, but unfortunately I am being oppressed by not having a highly paid and high profile writing/television/radio gig, and so cannot talk about it.

Fight the power.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

So now it's not just the hyper-right that can't abide freedom of speech in all its messy glory.

I'm walking away from this discussion, for a short period of mourning.

Will return later.

Is Freedom of Speech a topic we can't discuss freely? I'm not against, I just find this different view very interesting. It seems less black and white to me than it used to.

Sure it is. Dok also has the freedom to step out of the conversation if he chooses.

NO HE HAS TO STAY

OTHERWISE HE'S INFRINGING ON MY FREE SPEECH

SOMEHOW

Being lumped in with the hyper right for bringing up the discussion seemed, to me, to say "This isn't something that any sane person should discuss".

That's all.

And Oysters there seems to have the point... I'm not saying we should limit freedom of speech, I am simply surprised that it seems to work so well here and though it might be nice to discuss the advantages and risks associated with both systems.

As far as I can tell, even the poor people enjoy freedom of speech here... as long as they don't use inflammatory speech to incite hate, or make up baseless lies.

I agree that the sponsors pulling out and a potential libel suit are good ways to deal with Rush... it was the Palin comment that got me thinking about this viewpoint.

If limited Freedom is no freedom, then should access to arms be unlimited? Should the freedom to associate extend to racists and misogynists denying minorities or women? The arguments seem very similar.

[Doktor Howl]

Calling someone a 'slut' based on the information available was an opinion? Did Rush have any idea how many sexual partners she had,or how many times she had sex? For all we know, she may only have been with one guy, ever.

Opinions are not based on fact, most times.

Rush said two things:

1.  She's a slut.  <--- opinion

2.  She's a prostitute.  <--- slander

The first is a matter of opinion.  The second is a false statement of fact.