In the ideal situation, every individual should have the freedom to say what he or she wants, provided that he or she speaks responsibly (ie based on facts).

If what is said cannot be backed by fact or evidence, then obviously the person must be prepared to be sued... be it by the Government or by any individual who feels maligned by the perceived accusation.

If you start saying that it is good that the governments ban certain things, then where do you draw the line?

::agrees and nods his head::

<font color="lightblue">I would say that it depends on what type of government they claim to be...
A capitalist government would have no right to do anything of this sort, as it is entirely against their policy; and since they can be voted out...

On the other side of things; a communist government would have this right, to an extent. They have the right to restrict what you say against, say, your neighbour so long as you have not based your opinion on obvious facts.

I think. :D </font>

The epitomy of free speech can be found here...

> :0

[ 05-28-2002, 07:08 AM: Message edited by: /)eathKiller ]

No the ultimate in free speech is HERE http://www.zombo.com "The only limit is your imagination"

The power of words is undeniable. To give total freedom of speech is a hell of a risk

Personally, I would say that it should be fine to limit someone who, for instance, was trying to start an insurrection or a riot

You could not POSSIBLY stop people talking about how they think their government is crap. Whatever system you use, there will always be a lot of people doing that

I do think that a lot of limitations go too far, though. There have been a number of issues which people can no longer discuss just because others thought it distasteful. I vehemently disagree with that kind of limitation

Hmm I guess that freedom of speach as a word in it self means you have the right to say anything you like regardless of the truth or fact behind it. The trouble with this is that you can go spread alot of lies and destroy peoples lives. I think that a healthy deabte is good enough and that people shuld be able to say what they believe and want to, but they must also be ready to face the responsibility for doing such. No man can cry freedom without having to bear responsibility IMHO. If I want to say anything I like, I better be ready to listen to anything.

So this is smelling Kansas for me (Alice is a great book by the way! ;) ) So I would have to say that freedom of speech has to follow the democratic lines of freedom. You have to keep to realism, and can´t go around spreading lies or freely speak of things that will hurt people.

But I don´t think people should ban the difficult toppics, I think that rather then banning them, keep it controlled and only let them surface in discussions where people can answer them. Hmm, still smelling Kansas here..

It´s a difficult topic since the nature of freedom of speech and beliefs is apart of Democracy, the very core some would say.

Freedom is good, but responsibility must exist, and since we are not that resposible on a generlising aspect, (ie we still have courts, lawyers, prisons etc etc) I think we still need to have a couple of lines.

Oh good I thought I was the only one who noticed [img]smile.gif[/img]

HAIL THE KING BABY! :D