Right to freedom of communication or speech is a double edged knife. You can't say that you have total freedom of speech and at the say time you can.
For instance a sensitive topic like religion, when people express their own views in the name of freedom of speech it may offend others and may protest against it. It is rather common sense than freedom of choice or freedom of thoughts.
Freedom of speech means to respect everyone and yourself and express your views in a sophisticated way rather than just spilling the beans of one's ideology or belief.
And who gets to decide if something is "respect" or not?
And are you really suggesting that only people who can be "sophisticated" can have free speech?
But, I think the way of sophisticated talks may also misused. So we need proper legislation on what can be said and what can't.
Which is another issue, entirely. Legislation on speech should never curtail freedom of speech. It should never have a chilling effect. Especially when one "side" gets to say anything, but the other "side" is denied the same freedom.
Freedom of speech is the Right to Say anything, as the SC said it was OK during the Vietnam War to say, "F*** the Draft".
The only time that free speech is limited is when it becomes dangerous.
As in the case, Of Yelling Fire in a crowded Movie Theater, when there is no fire.
Freedom of Speech shouldn't be constrained, or chilled because people don't like what you have to say. That is the essence and reason for free speech is not to be silenced by anyone.
Political Correctness is anti free speech, and it should be treated as such. It is all Politics, and none of it is Correct. PC is patently Unconstitutional and it has no place in the Land of the Free.
Politeness is a social grace, but being Impolite is just rude. Being rude is not nice, but that is still part of free speech. Defamation, whether oral (Slander), or written (Libel) is still free speech, as Truth is a Complete Legal Defense. It is only illegal when it is not the truth. It is a civil matter and not a criminal act in and of itself.
PC itself should be construed as being INcorrect, as it is used for Social Manipulation.
You're saying "freedom to communicate" rather than free speech. Those are not necessarily the same, so it would be great if you could clarify.
Assuming you mean "freedom of speech", this is our human right to be able to express our thoughts, no matter how unpopular, without fear of retribution. This is something that's near and dear to my heart, because when my home was under siege by a union that chose to picket everywhere but the place of business, harass, intimidate and threaten me and my neighbours, while the police looked the other way and the media misrepresented us, freedom of speech was our only recourse. We made what was happening to us public through a blog. That lead to even more threats as the union demanded we remove the blog, since the truth made them look bad. At the same time, they had no problem slandering people in public, so it was "freedom for me, not for thee."
Like all human rights, there are times when we forfeit those rights through our own actions. It's not freedom of speech when you know it's false (libel/defamation/etc). It's not freedom of speech when you deliberately endanger others (encouraging people to kill, posting private addresses that endanger people's lives).
Human rights are messy things, but the whole point of them is that they are HUMAN rights, which we all have simply for existing, not civil rights, which are granted by government. Voting is a hard fought for right, but it's not a human right, which is why we can have limits (citizens only, adults only). The right to life is not trumped by someone else being inconvenienced by that life (abortion, euthanasia).
We have the right to free speech, but there is no right to not be offended.
Agreed. Milo Yianapolis said it best "your feelings don't have rights, and your feelings don't trump my rights to speech".
You are focusing to what I asked. Thanks. Freedom to communicate different and should be the fundamental right and should not create burden on others. We often more or less punish prisoners by reducing this right.
Thanks for sharing your view
All other freedoms depend on freedom of speech, so that you can organize groups with similar ideas and challenge the state when it is wrong.
Social justice warriors are trying to deny freedom of speech, so they can openly control every other aspect of society without it being discussed.
Nothing is without good or bad, and I dare say that even some elements of communism has its usefulness. Communication is one of the most effective tools in leadership; in the workforce; indeed so much springs from this in a positive way! But yes, it can also be a downer, and so called Freedom can create untold problems and suffering for human beings.
In the European Union (EU) the right to freedom to communicate is specifically covered by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights; the article also covers freedom of expression and freedom of speech.
However, under EU laws and British laws it is recognised that with the right to freedom to communicate comes responsibility. The British law is very specific and makes it a Criminal Offence to make communication which is hateful, threatening, abusive, or insulting and which targets a person on account of disability, ethnic or national origin, nationality, race, religion, sexual orientation, or skin colour.
In no way do EU or British laws restrict freedom to communicate or your right to freedom of speech, but they do help to ensure that you choose your words wisely so that you are less likely to incite hatred against vulnerable and minority groups who are less able to defend themselves.
by irachx 11 months ago
Do we really have freedom of speech?
by Kathryn L Hill 75 minutes ago
We need to keep in mind that freedom of speech was created for some Good. (As in disseminating what is True.)Not some Bad. (As in Lying.)There seems to be a lot of abuse of free speech on the internet and ELSEWHERE!
by Amanda Littlejohn 4 years ago
Which is more important, freedom of faith or freedom of speech?Many religious folks are decent, good people. Some of my best friends subscribe to institutionalised superstition - and are good humored enough to let me say that without taking offense. But most religions per se enshrine some deeply...
by Schandee Decker 3 years ago
Is anyone else sick of the words "politically correct"?Who thought this up, a politician and why are so many people going along with it. We keep changing in America to accommodate more people we don't need. Who else is sick of being told what to say and how to, isn't this going against...
by RealityTalk 5 years ago
Is freedom of speech compromised in America today?It appears difficult to publish articles pertaining to racism, unless the racist in question is white skinned. It also appears difficult to publish articles pertaining to same-sex marriage if the article is anti-same-sex marriage; even if the...
by LoliHey 19 months ago
Doesn't freedom of speech mean that there are no consequences?Lately we hear about people losing their jobs for stuff they tweet and post. People say, "Well, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences." I beg to differ, though. You're supposed to be able...
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|