Charlie Kirk shot

iamaround what is it with Trump and Australia?

So far Trump has refused to meet the PM.

Galaxy

I think there has been a certain level of fight for free speech in this country, particularly from feminists and the likes of the free speech union.
It is very complex -what do you do with the people who celebrate a murder- I don't want people removed from jobs for their views but would I feel safe being treated by a doctor who did that, I don't know.

That's why I have never advocated 100% free speech.

I heard an interesting discussion about this and their interpretation was that it depends on the job you do. So if you are, I don't know, working in a factory or doing accounts say, then what views you hold doesn't matter. But when it gets to be public facing things get complex. That distinction doesn't sit comfortably with me either. I would be lying however if I said that I would be comfortable being treated by a healthcare professional who had celebrated someones death.

Whitewavemark2

iamaround what is it with Trump and Australia?

So far Trump has refused to meet the PM.

Canada told him to go away and he thought he would try and mess with them?

He is destroying freedom of the press here in the US. Global press will be next. He won't like anyone reporting negative things about him.

imaround I was wrong about stoning gays.

I can't work out what you said. Kirk quoted Old Testament, seemingly to tell people gay was a wrong choice. Homosexuality innt a choice. God made us, it is the choice to lay with the same sex which is wrong Biblically.

It seems New Testament doesn't provide guidance for all in USA.

You were not wrong, merely not precise.

For gods sake.

So glad you didn't leave us imaround.

Have they forgotten that one of those commandments is
'Thou shalt not kill'?
Another says 'Thou shalt not commit adultery'

Maremia

So glad you didn't leave us imaround.

Have they forgotten that one of those commandments is
'Thou shalt not kill'?
Another says 'Thou shalt not commit adultery'

Who has forgotten?

Galaxy

I heard an interesting discussion about this and their interpretation was that it depends on the job you do. So if you are, I don't know, working in a factory or doing accounts say, then what views you hold doesn't matter. But when it gets to be public facing things get complex. That distinction doesn't sit comfortably with me either. I would be lying however if I said that I would be comfortable being treated by a healthcare professional who had celebrated someones death.

I'm the last person ever to say that something should be taught at school level because the curriculum is crowded enough, but I seriously think that there should be something which teaches young people about social media, propaganda and free speech. As a pupil, I spent an hour a week in the sixth form reading and comparing how different media sources "presented" news and why they did it the way they did.

You have just given one reason why "free speech" shouldn't trump other human rights. I can think of many others. Free speech is a complex issue and there will never be total agreement where the line should be drawn in some cases. People need to learn what those issues are and, in some cases, accept they cannot have what they want.

With regards to what's happening in the US, I don't even know where to start. It's not about "free speech". It's about bullying and twisting and weaponising constitutional law. It's mind boggling that anybody can even hear what Musk said at Robinson's rally and not see it for what it is. TBH that's when democracy (another of those sacred words) starts to destroy the very people it's supposed to serve.

But who gets to decide what is appropriate, who gets to draw the line? The likes of Alistair Campbell who has been blithely repeating lies about Charlie Kirk to all and sundry, or those people who shout gate speech at those who say men aren't women, etc, those people aren't the ones who I want to control speech. You ( not you personally) have to defend it as a principle because you don't get to choose who controls it.

Hate speech not gate speech!

The so called Christians who wish to impose their beliefs on the USA

Does anyone here think that Trump is allowing 'free speech'.

Don't think Trump understands the concept.

valdavi

Don't think Trump understands the concept.

Sadly I think he does valdavi. He has decided not to allow it if it affects him.

I don't want our police to spend their time arresting people for so called "hate speech crimes" but neither do I want people to have impunity when they incite people to do real harm to others. It's a difficult balance isn't it? However I do see a difference between arresting someone for suggesting someone should be " kicked in the balls" if they are found in a female toilet as opposed to inciting people to burn down a hostel whilst it is still occupied especially when it's said during a period of extreme tension and grief. Clearly others would see my examples differently and this is why its become such a complex issue. Is there anyone who would want anyone to be able to say anything, in any situation and to anyone and everyone regardless of the context and medium used?

It is complex but if the answer to that question is no, you have to be happy with Trump or Farage making the decisions on 'hate speech'. It is no good everyone getting upset now, this has been going on for a decade.

1984 has arrived at last.
Hate thought included.Police arriving mob handed to take you away.

Galaxy

But who gets to decide what is appropriate, who gets to draw the line? The likes of Alistair Campbell who has been blithely repeating lies about Charlie Kirk to all and sundry, or those people who shout gate speech at those who say men aren't women, etc, those people aren't the ones who I want to control speech. You ( not you personally) have to defend it as a principle because you don't get to choose who controls it.

No, I don't have to defend it as a principle. I don't believe on it as a free-standing principle. I also believe people should have some freedom from hatred.

The US constitution guarantees people the freedom to practise whatever religion they like. It also guarantees people freedom from being forced to practise a particular religion.

And again who gets to define hatred, these phrases are used as if their definition is simple.
Someone decided it was hateful for a comedian in this country to tell a joke, it might be we have to choose between people hearing unpleasant things or the abuse of power that controlling speech brings about.

I never claimed it was an easy decision, nor do I think the line is finite. There will always be discussion. I'd rather defend the unassailable right to discussion than an absolute right to free speech.

I would draw the line at incitement.

Because without a red line Jews, Muslims, blacks and other minorities will live in fear.

How many times on these threads do you see 'Post deleted. Refer to guidelines.'
So, if you are following threads, you are agreeing to be part of a form of censorship. Yes?

I don't think GN can be some sort of warrior in terms of free speech, although MN in particular has been extraordinary in its defense of speech.

Someone should take away Trump's free speech.

Seems as though he accidentally posted what was meant to be a private message to Pam Bondi on his public Truth Social account.

He is just casually wondering why his political opponents haven't been charged with something.

Hint: It's because their only "crime" is trying to hold him accountable for his criminal behavior.