Should there be limits on Free Speech?

[Primary Outcast]

Americans take their right of free speech for granted. It's a blessing that we can speak critically of government, etc.

The left is trying to limit "hate" speech, or speech that may cause offense to someone. This is ridiculous and is an oxymoron of free speech. This isn't what this thread is about.

I wonder though, if there should be limits to fake news and speech that is patently false with the intent to incite division and/or fear. Divided we are weak, united we are strong. I'm not making a case for or against this, but I'm interested in what others think.

[RocknRoll]

Americans take their right of free speech for granted. It's a blessing that we can speak critically of government, etc.

The left is trying to limit "hate" speech, or speech that may cause offense to someone. This is ridiculous and is an oxymoron of free speech. This isn't what this thread is about.

I wonder though, if there should be limits to fake news and speech that is patently false with the intent to incite division and/or fear. Divided we are weak, united we are strong. I'm not making a case for or against this, but I'm interested in what others think.

Who gets to decide what is “fake news” and what is not? Who decides what the “intent” of one’s speech is or is not? This is getting into some pretty shaky ground with the first amendment.

Of course, there are already limits to free speech. Take the age old, “you can’t stand up and shout “fire!” in a crowded theater, example.

[Primary Outcast]

I've been thinking about Alma 51 with the king men. Was it right for the Nephites to do nothing until it almost resulted in their destruction?

Several media outlets and celebrities are being sued right now for perpetuating a false narrative about the Covington High School kids in an effort to further their agenda. Should there be minimum prison terms for the guilty? Should they be getting sued at all?

Joseph Smith was imprisoned for treason I think twice. Definition of Treason: Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies. I believe there are some in the media and white house (and probably congress) that could be tried for Treason for their words and/or action.

I can see the need for a free press and the dangers of putting handcuffs (literally) on them. I can also foresee the eventual demise of the USA if the division and false narratives continue. It's a sticky situation and a slippery slope that could lead to losing essential rights of the people.

[tmac]

There is no question, Freedom of Speech is under attack. And it's true, what is good for the goose is also good for the gander.

But the reality is, Freedom of Speech has never -- not from the outset -- been unlimited. Libel, slander and defamation have always been exceptions to the concept of Freedom of Speech. When people say things that are false for the intentional purpose of hurting someone else, there needs to be accountability. Unfortunately, recourse in what I call the "so-called justice system" is both expensive and elusive. But if you've got enough money, sometimes it works. On that score, the First Lady, Melania Trump, has been quite successful with holding media outlets accountable for some of the false B.S. they say about her.

https://www.ksl.com/article/46476468/uk ... lse-report

https://ux.azcentral.com/story/news/wor ... 687536002/

[Fiannan]

Not to worry. Governments like the UK will make sure to protect the children, yes, it's always for the children, and make sure you cannot access porn on the net unless you turn over your ID # to the authorities or buy a special internet access card. All for making sure you are safe.

Same country arrests people for facebook and twitter posts.

[mes5464]

The distinction you want to make is truth and lie. It is and always should be a crime to lie.

[Fiannan]

The distinction you want to make is truth and lie. It is and always should be a crime to lie.

Atheists say that all religion is a lie.

[harakim]

I don't know that is should be a crime to lie. What if someone was giving a thought experiment that was a false way of thinking, then they could be arrested for "lying". I think any restriction of the freedom of speech is a slippery slope and probably bad.

I like the current test (well, before the hate speech law):
1. They have to know what they are saying is false
2. They have to cause harm
3. They had to mean to have caused harm

[mtm411]

I do think there should be limits. Private web hosters (like LDS Freedom Forum) should be able to ban posters or topics. Facebook, youtube, etc should be able to ban whomever they would like as well for any reason. I would say maybe it isn't moral or good for business to ban people too readily, but they are businesses.

Libel or slander should certainly not be allowed, and isn't. Creating a riot or encouraging or ordering someone to do something illegal should also not be allowed.

[mes5464]

The distinction you want to make is truth and lie. It is and always should be a crime to lie.

Atheists say that all religion is a lie.

They say that but it isn't true. Jesus Christ says "I am the truth and the light". Anything that tries to supplant Him is a lie.

[Fiannan]

I do think there should be limits. Private web hosters (like LDS Freedom Forum) should be able to ban posters or topics. Facebook, youtube, etc should be able to ban whomever they would like as well for any reason. I would say maybe it isn't moral or good for business to ban people too readily, but they are businesses.

Libel or slander should certainly not be allowed, and isn't. Creating a riot or encouraging or ordering someone to do something illegal should also not be allowed.

[larsenb]

I do think there should be limits. Private web hosters (like LDS Freedom Forum) should be able to ban posters or topics. Facebook, youtube, etc should be able to ban whomever they would like as well for any reason. I would say maybe it isn't moral or good for business to ban people too readily, but they are businesses.

Libel or slander should certainly not be allowed, and isn't. Creating a riot or encouraging or ordering someone to do something illegal should also not be allowed.

You could add speech that constitutes assault or physical threat to this, as well. But most of this should be governed by tort law, not by some omniscient overlord, such as the government.

[mtm411]

I do think there should be limits. Private web hosters (like LDS Freedom Forum) should be able to ban posters or topics. Facebook, youtube, etc should be able to ban whomever they would like as well for any reason. I would say maybe it isn't moral or good for business to ban people too readily, but they are businesses.

Libel or slander should certainly not be allowed, and isn't. Creating a riot or encouraging or ordering someone to do something illegal should also not be allowed.

You could add speech that constitutes assault or physical threat to this, as well. But most of this should be governed by tort law, not by some omniscient overlord, such as the government.

I totally agree. With the exception that if you tell your goon to blow someone's brains out, it doesn't make you innocent of murder just because it wasn't you who pulled the trigger.

[Fiannan]

Oh yeah, and people's feelings should count too, right? I mean, if a big, bad religion says things that might make liberals angry their right to personal, emotional, security should outweigh religious freedom and free speech. Right?

[Primary Outcast]

Russia senate approves bill to punish those pushing fake news.

https://www.rt.com/russia/453721-russia ... fake-news/

The war of words and ideas can be more devastating than bullets and bombs. It's a continuation of the war that began in heaven. There is a reason why Revelations 12 jumps back to the war in heaven, the continuation of that war is part of the last days.

Part of the new Russian law punishes those who criticize government officials. Ilhan Omar calling Trump "not human" is damaging to the country, civility, and is one of many things that leads to a divided nation, a weaker nation. Insults and name calling isn't productive, mature, or good governance.

This power though could (will) easily be used to bludgeon the opposition.

I don't think we should better enforce liable and slander laws. I don't think we should go the way of the Russians. I think that the downside is more dangerous than the upside, and as long as lies aren't being perpetuated (i.e that Russia hijacked the 2016 election) the majority of Americans should be given the opportunity to decide for themselves what they want to believe. Maybe the media should be forced to state what is their opinion and what is fact.