Is Free Speach Under Attack?
- Thread starter SteveEpperson
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
What have they done that you disagree with? That is an extremely broad category. Are they instigating people to commit an atrocity? Are you talking about Hitler screaming about the Jews being responsible for all evils and needing to die? Can you be a little more specific?
Also what do you mean by silenced? Are they being censored or simply ignored?
Also where is this? Is some satanist demanding to speak during a church service? We need a much more specific example.
I don't agree with people disrupting my class, especially if they are simply walking by in the hallway. I am all for silencing the kids in the hallway trying to disrupt my class.
Also what do you mean by silenced? Are they being censored or simply ignored?
Also where is this? Is some satanist demanding to speak during a church service? We need a much more specific example.
I don't agree with people disrupting my class, especially if they are simply walking by in the hallway. I am all for silencing the kids in the hallway trying to disrupt my class.
I'm sure if I sat and thought I could. But the thought I had when writing was the 80s metal controversies. Granted it extended beyond Christian boundaries into political, but Christians were there, in force, to try to shut down what was going on in that musical scene, with secular political backing.
For example, if I disagree with the Southern Baptist Convention about one of their tenants, should I be barred from speaking to their pastors?
Also, should I be de-platformed on an open forum for having a differing opinion than 99% of the participants?
Please, don't take offense to this, but it's difficult to understand what free speech really means unless you're from the US.
However, even here it's under attack.
So, I am directing my question mostly to a US audience.
Even so, I would hope that other countries could adopt a free-speech paradigm.
However, even nations like the US and Australia are reversing course when it comes to free-speech rights.
And it will be difficult to right the ship once the final nail is in the coffin.
Also, should I be de-platformed on an open forum for having a differing opinion than 99% of the participants?
Please, don't take offense to this, but it's difficult to understand what free speech really means unless you're from the US.
However, even here it's under attack.
So, I am directing my question mostly to a US audience.
Even so, I would hope that other countries could adopt a free-speech paradigm.
However, even nations like the US and Australia are reversing course when it comes to free-speech rights.
And it will be difficult to right the ship once the final nail is in the coffin.
Once again this is to vague. Are you disagreeing with one of the basic tenants of the faith? Are you rejecting Jesus Christ Lord of All? What are the rules of their open forum? Did you violate those rules? You are presenting your side of the story and in a very vague way.
Free speech is not the same as irresponsible speech. Here is the bigger issue. We are on a Christian forum that has its rules, if you abide by them and they still deplatform you then I think you have a case, but you can also go to another platform. However, "Facebook" and "Twitter" have an exemption from being treated as a publisher, they claim they are simply a utility. You can't have it both ways, they can't censor people and be exempt from the laws that other publishers are under.
Every publisher edits their content. By definition that is censorship. They decide what they want to publish and what they don't., what goes on the front page and what on the back, etc. If NYT Doesn't want to publish my editorial that is their prerogative.
Free speech is not the same as irresponsible speech. Here is the bigger issue. We are on a Christian forum that has its rules, if you abide by them and they still deplatform you then I think you have a case, but you can also go to another platform. However, "Facebook" and "Twitter" have an exemption from being treated as a publisher, they claim they are simply a utility. You can't have it both ways, they can't censor people and be exempt from the laws that other publishers are under.
Every publisher edits their content. By definition that is censorship. They decide what they want to publish and what they don't., what goes on the front page and what on the back, etc. If NYT Doesn't want to publish my editorial that is their prerogative.
-
1
- Show all
What does free speech mean? It means I have the right to say things you don't agree with. It doesn't mean that I have to publish things that you say.
So then what about Facebook because that is what they do when they censor posts based on their fact checkers. First, by doing that they admit they are a publisher that has editorial rights over your content. That is deceptive business practices, I was under the impression Facebook helped me set up my own website. Not true, they are telling you that it is their content and they have the final say over whether or not it is published.
I was put on a 30 day suspension by Facebook because someone found my posts offensive. I wasn't told what the post was, nor was I told what was offensive or even if what was posted violated any rule. There was no way for me to adjust my behavior or be corrected. It was simply arbitrary sending the message that they could and would mess with me any time they wished. So, the same day I got that message I deleted my account. It is very difficult to do and they keep at you for 30 days to get you to undo that and there are many tripwires which will automatically undo that if you were to accidentally trip them. But I deleted it. If every single person who was suspended by Facebook did the same on the same day we would have put a stop to this censorship already.
So then what about Facebook because that is what they do when they censor posts based on their fact checkers. First, by doing that they admit they are a publisher that has editorial rights over your content. That is deceptive business practices, I was under the impression Facebook helped me set up my own website. Not true, they are telling you that it is their content and they have the final say over whether or not it is published.
I was put on a 30 day suspension by Facebook because someone found my posts offensive. I wasn't told what the post was, nor was I told what was offensive or even if what was posted violated any rule. There was no way for me to adjust my behavior or be corrected. It was simply arbitrary sending the message that they could and would mess with me any time they wished. So, the same day I got that message I deleted my account. It is very difficult to do and they keep at you for 30 days to get you to undo that and there are many tripwires which will automatically undo that if you were to accidentally trip them. But I deleted it. If every single person who was suspended by Facebook did the same on the same day we would have put a stop to this censorship already.
Very definitely. Since free speech is a major threat to tyrannical lies, it is severely under attack right now. Throughout the "free" world.
It all began with the failure to seriously address censorship by the so-called "social media" like Facebook, Twitter, etc as well as Big Tech (Google etc). There should have been extremely severe penalties for censoring free speech, since it is a constitutional guarantee in free countries (or formerly free countries). The Republican politicians -- who are supposed to provide oversight over constitutional guarantees -- were too busy with their own selfish preoccupations, and could not be bothered about things that really matter.
So now anyone who disagrees with the godless Leftist/Marxist/Communist/Anarchist viewpoint is shut out and "cancelled". The only views that all allowed to be publicly aired are those which correspond to those of the lying media and lying politicians and public health officials.
There was a time when only Communist countries and tyrannies such the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Iran, etc. muzzled their citizens and locked up honest journalists. Today Canada's Liberal scoundrels want to censor even the internet (which is supposed to be a medium for the free circulation of all ideas, good or bad). Fortunately their bill did not go too far this time, but if Communist Trudeau remains in office, the internet will be weaponized for the Leftists.
Christians must be the strongest supporters of free speech. The truth will always win over Satanic and demonic lies. Yet there are several "Christian" forums which censor anything that does not fit into their particular ideology. Many believers have been banned or have removed themselves from these tyrannical forums because they hate the truth.
It all began with the failure to seriously address censorship by the so-called "social media" like Facebook, Twitter, etc as well as Big Tech (Google etc). There should have been extremely severe penalties for censoring free speech, since it is a constitutional guarantee in free countries (or formerly free countries). The Republican politicians -- who are supposed to provide oversight over constitutional guarantees -- were too busy with their own selfish preoccupations, and could not be bothered about things that really matter.
So now anyone who disagrees with the godless Leftist/Marxist/Communist/Anarchist viewpoint is shut out and "cancelled". The only views that all allowed to be publicly aired are those which correspond to those of the lying media and lying politicians and public health officials.
There was a time when only Communist countries and tyrannies such the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Iran, etc. muzzled their citizens and locked up honest journalists. Today Canada's Liberal scoundrels want to censor even the internet (which is supposed to be a medium for the free circulation of all ideas, good or bad). Fortunately their bill did not go too far this time, but if Communist Trudeau remains in office, the internet will be weaponized for the Leftists.
Christians must be the strongest supporters of free speech. The truth will always win over Satanic and demonic lies. Yet there are several "Christian" forums which censor anything that does not fit into their particular ideology. Many believers have been banned or have removed themselves from these tyrannical forums because they hate the truth.
I don't think free speech is an "anytime, anyplace" thing. I've heard people assert that free speech means you have a "right to be heard" which to me is nonsense. People can talk all they want, but nobody has to listen. Your free speech has to be compelling enough to get people to listen.
Also, if you're being paid to do work, shut up and work! Unless you can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time, but even then- don't distract the people you work with.
Venue matters too. Follow the house rules, and use common sense. There's some really stupid people thinking they are doing "free speech" - if you're just shouting at someone to drown out what they are saying that's you trying to censor them, not exercising free speech.
So, ultimately it depends on what you mean- because sometimes when people are "silenced" it's because they were trying to abuse free speech. As somebody who voted for President Trump- I don't care that youtube/facebook/twitter kicked him off because it's their platforms. I'm also irritated that he said he was creating a competing platform and then never did. I don't agree with white supremacy but the Charlottesville protest thing was their right- and from what I understand they had a permit to do it while the counterprotesters didn't. If your "counterprotest" doesn't get a permit when a permit is required- that's not free speech, that's just you trying to violate someone else's free speech that you don't like.
So there are some circumstances when people being "silenced" isn't a really a violation of their free speech, because they really weren't exercising free speech to begin with. But yeah, if someone is exercising free speech in good faith, they shouldn't be silenced. Except for Marxists, they should always be silenced (just kidding. Without Marxists, who would we pour out all our severe criticisms and harsh rebukes?).
Also, if you're being paid to do work, shut up and work! Unless you can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time, but even then- don't distract the people you work with.
Venue matters too. Follow the house rules, and use common sense. There's some really stupid people thinking they are doing "free speech" - if you're just shouting at someone to drown out what they are saying that's you trying to censor them, not exercising free speech.
So, ultimately it depends on what you mean- because sometimes when people are "silenced" it's because they were trying to abuse free speech. As somebody who voted for President Trump- I don't care that youtube/facebook/twitter kicked him off because it's their platforms. I'm also irritated that he said he was creating a competing platform and then never did. I don't agree with white supremacy but the Charlottesville protest thing was their right- and from what I understand they had a permit to do it while the counterprotesters didn't. If your "counterprotest" doesn't get a permit when a permit is required- that's not free speech, that's just you trying to violate someone else's free speech that you don't like.
So there are some circumstances when people being "silenced" isn't a really a violation of their free speech, because they really weren't exercising free speech to begin with. But yeah, if someone is exercising free speech in good faith, they shouldn't be silenced. Except for Marxists, they should always be silenced (just kidding. Without Marxists, who would we pour out all our severe criticisms and harsh rebukes?).
There is no hair splitting, if you are running a Christian forum and someone comes in with a position that is clearly antithetical to the forum you can let the person know that they are in the wrong place and if they don't take the message you can shut them down. If it is my house I get to decide who comes and who has to leave.
Start your own forum or find a forum that is more suited to what you have to say.
If I am looking for a forum where I can discuss certain matters and questions with other Christians I don't need to have atheists acting as trolls in that forum.
Start your own forum or find a forum that is more suited to what you have to say.
If I am looking for a forum where I can discuss certain matters and questions with other Christians I don't need to have atheists acting as trolls in that forum.
-
1
- Show all
I read your entire response. However, to save space, I only highlighted the first few words.
You make an excellent point all around.
Just so that I am clear, do you think the independent platforms offering community forums have the responsibility to allow all speech even though it may be highly controversial?
(I'm not talking about vulgarity or child porn or inciting a riot, etc.)
You make an excellent point all around.
Just so that I am clear, do you think the independent platforms offering community forums have the responsibility to allow all speech even though it may be highly controversial?
(I'm not talking about vulgarity or child porn or inciting a riot, etc.)
Yes, I have been very clear that Facebook and Twitter are actively censoring speech.
No, the US government is prohibited from censoring speech.
Facebook can ban certain speech, perhaps hate speech, certain words, etc. They can post these rules for all to see. If someone violates a rule you tell them -- "in your last post you used a prohibited word -- see our rules." I have no problem if there are rules that everyone has to abide by, they are clearly articulated, and when you violate a rule they let you know.
That is not the case with Facebook, it is extremely arbitrary. In my case they didn't accuse me of violating any rule, only that someone complained. What does that mean, that anyone can simply say I don't like this person's facebook post so Facebook listens to them and shuts down that person's site? Why would anyone put up with that?
I heard they recently banned a post by their factcheckers and all the person did was cite the New England Journal of Medicine.
I consider it outrageous for people whose facebook is tied to their livelihood. They were deceived by Facebook and have suffered harm and will suffer harm if they have to move to a new social media platform.
No, the US government is prohibited from censoring speech.
Facebook can ban certain speech, perhaps hate speech, certain words, etc. They can post these rules for all to see. If someone violates a rule you tell them -- "in your last post you used a prohibited word -- see our rules." I have no problem if there are rules that everyone has to abide by, they are clearly articulated, and when you violate a rule they let you know.
That is not the case with Facebook, it is extremely arbitrary. In my case they didn't accuse me of violating any rule, only that someone complained. What does that mean, that anyone can simply say I don't like this person's facebook post so Facebook listens to them and shuts down that person's site? Why would anyone put up with that?
I heard they recently banned a post by their factcheckers and all the person did was cite the New England Journal of Medicine.
I consider it outrageous for people whose facebook is tied to their livelihood. They were deceived by Facebook and have suffered harm and will suffer harm if they have to move to a new social media platform.
-
1
- Show all