Free Speech

This is a really simple one for me.

Everyone has the right of free speech, but it comes with responsibilities. If you choose to use words to incite violence or use discriminatory language then you should be held legally responsible. People being arrested now for social media statements deserve what they get, if this is what they have posted.

How would you feel if a terrorist started posting extremist words on social media? Would you champion their right to free speech then? There is a line, it shouldn't be crossed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dubbag

As long as it's responsible. Exercising free speech involves exercising responsibility.

---

Exactly Dubs!

People should be mindful of the existing laws and these include incitement to hatred or violence but it is not always straightforward. For example, the Equalities Act lists various "protected characteristics" which include age, *** and ***ual orientation, race (or colour of skin) and disability (physical or mental). For me, these are all inherent characteristics of individuals that they cannot change about themselves so are right to be included.

The Act also covers pregnancy and gender reassignment to prevent discrimination against those in these categories which I also get (though this does not legally mean that it is unlawful to debate whether trans women are "real" women for example as recent test cases have proven).On the other hand, the Act also covers religion or religious belief which-to my mind- is trickier.

Clearly, violent acts brought against anyone-whether Protestant, Catholic, Jewish or Muslim etc-purely based on their religion is wrong but, whilst I accept that the vast majority are born into a particular religious culture, religious beliefs (or, indeed atheism) are just that-beliefs. They are not truly inherent characteristics and surely-as with political beliefs-are therefore surely up for debate? The tenets of extremist religious viewpoints can be homophobic or ***ist for example. These are inherent traits protected under law and must surely trump religious beliefs?

The recent jailing of a 53 year old carer with a previous "good character" for typing "blow the mosques up with adults in it" may truly seem like using a hammer to crack a nut, but clearly keyboard warriors cannot continue to incite violence/hatred and get away with it even if "they didn't really mean it". Such individuals do not only have their impact felt in stirring up racial hatred, however, as keyboard warriors can severely affect individuals through a range of comments including bullying, body shaming, misogyny etc. Surely it is long overdue that such people are held to account for the impact of their actions?

In the case of this particular woman, personally, I do find the sentencing ridiculously harsh in that she apparently made the one comment and has no history of making similar. There seems no evidence that she deliberately and continually acted to stir up racial hatred for example.Yes, she needs to face some consequences but a jail sentence seems disproportionate to the offence.

As for the subject of "offending" someone v free speech this is much trickier and the right to offend (NOT including incitement to hatred) outside of protected characteristics particularly would seem to trump the right to be offended. Not clear cut but I personally find Rowan Atkinson's 2018 speech on the right of "Free Speech" and the need to reform section 5 (posted on youtube) hard to disagree with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WBA123

This is a really simple one for me.

Everyone has the right of free speech, but it comes with responsibilities. If you choose to use words to incite violence or use discriminatory language then you should be held legally responsible. People being arrested now for social media statements deserve what they get, if this is what they have posted.

How would you feel if a terrorist started posting extremist words on social media? Would you champion their right to free speech then? There is a line, it shouldn't be crossed.

---

Yep, well put. 👍
The moot point is that such arrests are made equally across the board (ie not just those who express right wing views) so as to avoid populist accusations of 2 tier policing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omegstrat6

Yep, well put. ��
The moot point is that such arrests are made equally across the board (ie not just those who express right wing views) so as to avoid populist accusations of 2 tier policing.

---

100% - has to work both ways, same with violence, rioters locked up within a few days but has there been any outcome from the guy at the airport who attacked 3 police officers. A 15yr old is faced with a possibility of a 10yr sentence for his part in the riots, man alive.

Respect and behaviour. Everyone should be treated with respect as a default setting, you dont have to earn it. Behaviour has to be acceptable. If it isn't, it can be punished by law. Bad behaviour can earn your disrespect.