Timeline for Does "freedom of speech" only refer to safety from the government?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 19 at 16:35 | comment | added | bharring | Would this (good) answer be slightly improved by referencing the Rule of Law concept it heavily alludes to? | |
| Aug 17 at 4:45 | comment | added | Ted Wrigley | @Ryan_L: That's a vacuous principle the way you've put it. People are always able to say what they like, anywhere and anytime. It's just that in some places and times saying certain things has unpleasant consequences. The Liberal principle is that the state should guarantee that right, by not causing unpleasant consequences, and punishing unpleasant consequences from other citizens. | |
| Aug 16 at 20:37 | comment | added | Ryan_L | @TedWrigley Freedom of speech the concept that people should be able to say what they like. The First Amendment only says the government can't infringe on it, but that doesn't mean other people/entities restricting your speech isn't infringing on it. 1A only codifies the idea, the idea exists separately from it. | |
| Aug 16 at 19:34 | comment | added | Ted Wrigley | @Ryan_L: I'm not sure that says anything more than I said, though it's a bit more specific. The usage of 'frontiers' is a clear nod to state suppression of information ('frontiers' is another way of saying 'borders', which are state-specific), and if states are not suppressing expression and not allowing private groups to use force to suppress expression, then Article 19 is satisfied. | |
| Aug 16 at 19:28 | comment | added | Barmar | @TedWrigley Perhaps the sense embodied in the Uniform Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19. | |
| Aug 16 at 19:26 | comment | added | Ted Wrigley | @Ryan_L: That's an interesting thought, but I think you'd be hard pressed to say what that 'broader' definition is. can you elaborate? | |
| Aug 16 at 18:24 | comment | added | Ryan_L | "The concept of freedom of speech only refers to government interference with the free expressions of political ideas." No, thats the First Amendment. Freedom of speech is more broad than that. The government is not the only entity that can censor things. | |
| Aug 16 at 15:32 | history | edited | Ted Wrigley | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
fix
|
| Aug 16 at 15:19 | history | answered | Ted Wrigley | CC BY-SA 4.0 |