• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Whom would you help?

Whom would you help?

  • I would help strong Liberals criminalize hate speech

    Votes: 1 2.1%
  • I would help strong Conservatives criminalize US flag burning

    Votes: 1 2.1%
  • I would protect Free Speech from all sides

    Votes: 45 95.7%

  • Total voters
    47

SCitizen

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2014
Messages
2,138
Reaction score
316
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Some people value Free Speech, yet some people believe that Free Speech is an excuse for unethical behavior.
 
Some people value Free Speech, yet some people believe that Free Speech is an excuse for unethical behavior.

You sure make the answer (option 3) simple to choose. :coffeepap:
 
You sure make the answer (option 3) simple to choose. :coffeepap:

I hope so. The majority of people in High Courts of Britain, Canada, Australia, NZ have chosen option 1.
 
I was hoping for something more challenging.
 
Exactly, and that is the best way to handle a tootsie pop. You have to get all the flavors mixed to get the full effect.

I like ice cream more.
 
I like ice cream more.

I do too. I take a couple of frozen chocolate covered graham crackers, put them in the bottom of a bowl, and cover 'em with Breyers Natural Vanilla ice cream. I break up the graham crackers as I eat the ice cream. It's marvelous, and a coronary nightmare. I therefore don't allow myself that pleasure often.
 
1:0:15

USA has some of the worst and some of the best qualities. Free Speech is the best. Lack of good welfare is one of the worst.
 
Some people value Free Speech, yet some people believe that Free Speech is an excuse for unethical behavior.

im ok with criminalizing threats

i guess you should be aloud spaces where you can to insult and offend other people
 
The Supreme Court has noted more than once that the freedom of speech is not absolute. The First Amendment does not bar laws against defamation, obscenity, speech which creates a clear and present danger of imminent lawless action, false or deceptive advertising, child pornography, or even fighting words, provided the law is carefully drafted to avoid being overly broad or vague as to what is prohibited.

Texas v. Johnson, the 1989 case in which the Court struck down state laws against desecrating the U.S. flag, was a 5-4 decision. I agree with the dissenters--and with the 48 states which had such laws at the time--and hope the Court will one day overrule Johnson.
 
The Supreme Court has noted more than once that the freedom of speech is not absolute. The First Amendment does not bar laws against defamation, obscenity, speech which creates a clear and present danger of imminent lawless action, false or deceptive advertising, child pornography, or even fighting words, provided the law is carefully drafted to avoid being overly broad or vague as to what is prohibited.

Definitely -- also advertising illegal drugs. Also encouraging someone to commit a crime.
 
Some people value Free Speech, yet some people believe that Free Speech is an excuse for unethical behavior.

I've been called a racist, a misogynist, a xenophobe, homophobic, and many many other names for defending peoples free speech. I'm quite sure that I'll continue to be called those as I'll never stop defending peoples Rights. As long as I know why and what I am doing I couldn't really care less what other peoples say or think about me.
 
Some people value Free Speech, yet some people believe that Free Speech is an excuse for unethical behavior.



Generally I favor freedom, even if risky and sometimes uncomfortable, to the risks of authoritarianism.
 
Generally I favor freedom, even if risky and sometimes uncomfortable, to the risks of authoritarianism.

I agree 100%. Hopefully USA will keep Free Speech.
 
I strongly support the freedom of speech. But it seems to me some people take their good intentions too far, and become convinced that the First Amendment protects more speech than the people who wrote and ratified it meant it to. I don't believe we can't make an outrage like desecrating the U.S. flag in public a crime, any more than I believe we can't make incitement to imminent lawlessness a crime. We should not think that the First Amendment demands that we just sit on our hands and watch, meekly, while some disloyal bastard flagrantly insults everything this country stands for. I find it hard to believe that any of the men of the founding generation would ever have imagined that the Constitution prohibited Congress from making it a crime to desecrate the flag of the U.S. in public. And they certainly did not imagine that the people of a state could not make it a crime.
 
Last edited:
I don't believe we can't make an outrage like desecrating the U.S. flag in public a crime, any more than I believe we can't make incitement to imminent lawlessness a crime. We should not think that the First Amendment demands that we just sit on our hands and watch, meekly, while some disloyal bastard flagrantly insults everything this country stands for.

I do not know -- probably 30% of US population would approve burning US flag. It is not such a big deal.
 
Last edited:
(4) More Cowbell!
 
I do not know -- probably 30% of US population would approve burning US flag. It is not such a big deal.

It should be up to the people of each state to decide whether they think publicly desecrating the U.S. flag is a big enough deal to make it a crime. All but two states had laws like that in 1989, when Texas v. Johnson was decided, and I agree with the dissenting justices in that case that those laws did not violate the First Amendment.
 
It should be up to the people of each state to decide whether they think publicly desecrating the U.S. flag is a big enough deal to make it a crime. All but two states had laws like that in 1989, when Texas v. Johnson was decided, and I agree with the dissenting justices in that case that those laws did not violate the First Amendment.

I disagree. I believe we should protect Freedom of Speech both from Liberal and Conservative side. Most people believe that neither burning US flag nor "hate speech" should be a crime.
 
I disagree. I believe we should protect Freedom of Speech both from Liberal and Conservative side. Most people believe that neither burning US flag nor "hate speech" should be a crime.

I wonder how you know that the opinion of the American people on this subject has changed so drastically since 1989. At that time, most Americans did believe that public desecration of the flag should be a crime, or it would not have been a crime in 48 of the 50 states.
 
Back
Top Bottom