No, in the USA we simply do not stop people from expressing their views because we think they are wrong. Who decides who is to be silenced, and who is not? That path is much too dangerous, and leads to fascism or communism (the bad sort) or the like. The people who believed him are responsible for believing him, and for the choices they made. I would quote M. Arouet here, but I suspect I do not need to.
Quote: (TomS @ May 27 2011, 4:06 PM)
No, in the USA we simply do not stop people from expressing their views because we think they are wrong.
Who decides who is to be silenced, and who is not?
That path is much too dangerous, and leads to fascism or communism (the bad sort) or the like.
The people who believed him are responsible for believing him, and for the choices they made.
I would quote M. Arouet here, but I suspect I do not need to.
I'm glad you said that Tom as so often "free speech" seems to mean that you can say what you like as long as it fits with my world viewpoint.
It is a dangerous path to go down, but I guess there must be some absolutes though otherwise anarchy would reign.
A perfectly silly thread lies battered
and abused, drenched in its own complications.
Well, you started it.
Quote: (TomS @ May 27 2011, 1:44 PM)
Well, you started it.
Rolling cuboid?
Quote: (TonyR @ May 27 2011, 1:50 PM)
Quote: (TomS @ May 27 2011, 1:44 PM)
Well, you started it.
Rolling cuboid?
? ? ?
http://www.gaming-age.com/preview/ps3/cuboid
Tom,
If someone with the view that (asians/blacks/Jews/what-have-you) are evil and the product of Satan and should be actively discouraged from reproducing wanted a broadcast licence to spread their views on the publicly owned airwaves - would that be okay? Would they be entitled to use the airwaves that YOU own to share their views with the world?
What if they had scriptural references to support their view? Now it’s not just a free speech but also a religious issue - would that make it okay?
Free speech is primarily about political speech, but that’s so tied up with religion that perhaps that does not matter. As to the example you give, yes, that is protected speech. There are limits, but merely arguing that they should not reproduce is no big deal. They own the air as much as I do, and have an equal right to use it. I know that you have read Mill’s On Liberty – I’d mostly just make those arguments here. 
Americans are not very good as some things, but free speech is one thing we mostly get right. 
I guess this goes to one of the (few) fundamental differences between the United States and Canada; the U.S. being founded on the premise of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and Canada on peace, order and good government. (Not that either country has been excellent in its fidelity to its premise.)
We tend to be a tad socialistic up here - our political centre is left of your political centre.
So a crackpot abusing the public airwaves seems to me like the elevation of the individual’s rights over the rights of the collective - generally a no-no in the Canadian scheme of things.
Quote: (BillClarke @ May 28 2011, 9:34 AM)
I guess this goes to one of the (few) fundamental differences between the United States and Canada; the U.S. being founded on the premise of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and Canada on peace, order and good government. (Not that either country has been excellent in its fidelity to its premise.)
We tend to be a tad socialistic up here - our political centre is left of your political centre.
So a crackpot abusing the public airwaves seems to me like the elevation of the individual's rights over the rights of the collective - generally a no-no in the Canadian scheme of things.
Bill. This feels about right to me. If this guy was broadcasting in the UK the lefties and media would have crushed him.
You guys have read On Liberty?
Quote: (TomS @ May 28 2011, 12:27 PM)
You guys have read On Liberty?
Honestly!? Nope.
Quote: (TomS @ May 29 2011, 7:27 AM)
You guys have read On Liberty?
Nope
deleted… somehow managed to double post…
Quote: (TomS @ May 28 2011, 4:47 PM)
I probably will. I obsess. And you, Tom, always throw a juicy bone;-)
But! Honestly, guys. In my youth, I became distraught by the general behavior of man. In the interest of my own sanity, I decided to not take humanity seriously, until we get real. I remain resolute.
- We’ve not even nearly begun to appreciate what we have.
Given that my town is crashing down around my ears because of corrupt and incompetent people, I sort of feel like I have to care. 
But we’re doing good things to try to fix it.
Yes, Tom - I’ve read Mill - Have you? (rhetorical question)
What about the harm principle? In relation to Camping, I mean.
Frankly, I was never impressed by Mill’s thinking. Interesting and thought-provoking, yes. But mostly about as practical as Marx (whom, I suspect, he would have endorsed as a “benign despot”.)