In Defense of Insulting People and Ideas...

[Rick O'Shez]

model barge

I've never heard it called that before.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Such provocation can also contribute to undermining the authority and power of dangerous people. How powerful do you think Pat Robertson would be if he were not daily provoked, insulted, and made fun of? Between your butt and his whip lies a lot of insults, in my opinion, Riverwolf.

I agree completely.

I saw something relevant the other day:

World leaders sitting on the toilet | Dangerous Minds

While the pictures themselves are a bit silly, I think they're important because, if nothing else, they help to knock down the walls that might block criticism of authority figures on substantive issues.

Treating anyone or anything as above criticism is dangerous, IMO, and it gives that person or thing tremendous power.

Poking the bear carries with it some risk, but it's necessary. A bear that's used to being poked reacts less violently than one that's being poked for the first time... and sometimes, bears need to be poked.

 

[ImaTroll]

So far as I can see, one of the key ways in which anti-social politicians, pundits, and preachers attack freedom of speech is to say it is justified when someone's speech offends or insults others.

there may be a misunderstanding. free speech allows us to insult others. however, speech which results in 'character defamation' (slander) is illegal in the US. this is actually the type of speech which is legally restricted. not merely insults.

 

[Estro Felino]

yes, I totally agree.
In fact when I speak my mind and say something people don't agree with, they attack and insult me.
they take personally what I think about people in general.
so I've decide to stop saying what I think.

 

[Revoltingest]

there may be a misunderstanding. free speech allows us to insult others. however, speech which results in 'character defamation' (slander) is illegal in the US. this is actually the type of speech which is legally restricted. not merely insults.

Slander (spoken) & libel (written) aren't illegal, but the defamer can be sued for damages.

 

[Revoltingest]

yes, I totally agree.
In fact when I speak my mind and say something people don't agree with, they attack and insult me.
they take personally what I think about people in general.
so I've decide to stop saying what I think.

Oh, don't be so thin skinned, ya mewl'n little popsicle smoocher!
Speak up! (I have some mud to sling & poop to fling.)

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Slander (spoken) & libel (written) aren't illegal, but the defamer can be sued for damages.

Can they still be sued if what is said / written is true?

 

[Revoltingest]

Can they still be sued if what is said / written is true?

You can sue anyone for anything. Merit is not required, but it can help.
But if you say something true about someone, then you're very likely to win their libel/slander suit against you.

 

[ImaTroll]

Slander (spoken) & libel (written) aren't illegal, but the defamer can be sued for damages.

okay.

 

[apophenia]

For those and other reasons, we should drop this nonsense about free speech ending where insults begin. That is so childish and thin-skinned. A free humanity is not possible with such views.

**** off.

And get that towel off your head, do you think you're friggin Peter O'Toole or what ?

When I can say that to an arab and we both laugh, we can all breathe easier.

I'm OK with being a black Irish jew btw. That is my ancestry. Only a little bit black, a little bit jewish and a little bit Irish crossed with various skippy slappers and wasters. But I get offended by people with no respect for beshara mongrel hybrids.

 

[Quintessence]

When it comes to freedom of speech, it never seems to occur to some folks that there can also be consequences to NOT exercising it.

Of course there are. I never said otherwise. Pointing out the obvious fact that actions have consequences doesn't preclude the equally obvious fact that inaction has consequences. And it certainly doesn't preclude the obvious wisdom of "think before you act."

 

[Akivah]

All this 'calling out' for free speech...... until we don't want it!

Basically, free speech is allowed until it insults me.

 

[Sunstone]

Of course there are. I never said otherwise. Pointing out the obvious fact that actions have consequences doesn't preclude the equally obvious fact that inaction has consequences. And it certainly doesn't preclude the obvious wisdom of "think before you act."

I suspect that if more of us actually did "think before we acted" the whole world would now being going out of their way to insult and ridicule the terrorists, as that seems to be a fairly effective way of reducing someone's prestige and power.

 

[rosends]

Can they still be sued if what is said / written is true?

Sued, sure. Successfully, not so much

Defenses to Libel and Slander | LegalMatch Law Library

 

[1robin]

As a gay man, who regularly listens to religious people, I can't feel any sympathy for religious people feeling insulted by Charle Hebdo. @1robin confidently asserts that I spread infectious diseases. @A_servant_of_one asserts that my 23 year relationship is pure lust. The list of people who feel that their religion gives them reason to insult me is endless.

I will insult religious people with the truth any time I want to do so.

Tom

I have no idea how you tagged me into this discussion or why?

1. I have never mentioned Charle Hebdo. Can you quote where I did?
2. I never said anything about your spreading a disease. Can you quote where I did?

My comments were about what a general behavior causes and the lack of any justifiable gain to compensate for it. I however gave up on the homosexuality thread because no one had good arguments against my two simplistic point. It was either an emotional rant, the distortion of what I had said (this being an example), or to ignore one or both my primary claims. I have no interest in going through that again. Also, my argument had nothing what so ever to do with my religion and I specifically said it was purely secular (so distortion number 3).

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Only a little bit black, a little bit jewish and a little bit Irish crossed with various skippy slappers and wasters.

Great combination! I'm Irish with a bit of Spanish, blended with a hint of cockney.

 

[apophenia]

Great combination! I'm Irish with a bit of Spanish, blended with a hint of cockney.

Yeah, I picked you for a mongrel, despite the glasses and the fringe.The purebreds are so unhealthy and highly strung. Master Race, Chosen of God ... blah blah blah. Strong free-range hybrids with no racial or cultural loyalty - that's what we need more of

 

[MD]

Yeah, I picked you for a mongrel, despite the glasses and the fringe.The purebreds are so unhealthy and highly strung. Master Race, Chosen of God ... blah blah blah. Strong free-range hybrids with no racial or cultural loyalty - that's what we need more of

Indians and Pakistanis are pretty identical 'racially' yet have fought numerous wars over each other over national and religious reasons. I believe human beings will always find reasons to find differences and eventually use those differences for war, conflict and genocide.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It seems to me that censorship is one of the most common and dangerous ways in which governments and other institutions repress humans. It is dangerous not only because it can prevent people from finding out the truth, but also because freedom of speech and press are cornerstone freedoms: Other freedoms are meaningless without them. For instance, freedom of religion, without freedom of speech, is virtually a hollow and meaningless farce.

So far as I can see, one of the key ways in which anti-social politicians, pundits, and preachers attack freedom of speech is to say it is justified when someone's speech offends or insults others.

As it happens, that's pure BS.

It's BS because, among other reasons, there will always be someone who is insulted by anyone or anything that disagrees with him or her. Often enough, that person will not say, "I am insulted because you have told me something I disagree with." They will lie and say instead, "You said something just to insult me."

Again, it is BS to attack free speech on the basis of whether or not it insults anyone because we are a species that all too often finds the truth insulting. In fact, though it is common to claim to be insulted by lies, we tend to be insulted at least as often by truths. Thus to attack free speech on the basis of whether it insults people is, in effect, to promote the suppression of the truth.

For those and other reasons, we should drop this nonsense about free speech ending where insults begin. That is so childish and thin-skinned. A free humanity is not possible with such views.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[Sunstone]

Indians and Pakistanis are pretty identical 'racially' yet have fought numerous wars over each other over national and religious reasons. I believe human beings will always find reasons to find differences and eventually use those differences for war, conflict and genocide.

Personally, Shahz, I find your usage of the British quotes around the word "racially" to be irreconcilably offensive to me, and consequently, grounds for a lawsuite.