Why free speech should be absolute

[exploited]

That's fine and all, and I agree, people don't have the right to not be offended.

But you shouldn't have used the word absolute, because you do not support absolute freedom of speech, as you have made abundantly clear.

[Mathurin]

In my defense, I was expecting a bunch of Euros or neo-liberals to come in swinging the "no hate" flag.

However, in reality, the best you can say, is that I dont believe that all the noises coming from a human mouth count as speech. No matter what ideas people want to express, They should have an absolute right to express those ideas, the only limitations come when they are not just expressing those ideas, but forcing their speech upon others.

[OGPhilly]

lol why would neoliberals give a shit about this topic?

[Mathurin]

In the fairly recent past it was a liberal topic of discussion, banning hate speech to "protect" minorities who might be offended. The UK has banned hate speech, resulting in some preachers being arrested for saying that homosexuality is a sin (most were released, charges dropped). Germany has banned the nazis and all memorabilia, something I dont like but am loathe to attack them over.
In several nations in the EU holocaust denial is illegal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_again ... ust_denial


These laws ban spreading certain ideas because they have been deemed offensive.

In the US the courts have ruled time and again that the ideas that offend might be the most important ideas of all.

[exploited]

Thanks, but none of that has anything whatsoever to do with neoliberalism.

[Mathurin]

You are correct, sorry bout that I was working from an incorrect definition of neo-lib