Wendy Williams . . . I can't even

[CdnCarrie]

What? You do know that the term "racist" actually has a definition - one that includes at least some reference to race. You might even be able to lump ethnicity in there, but really, ethnicity and/or nationality does not determine your "race". Being derogatory, discriminatory, disrespectful and hateful towards people based on their religion, creed, sexuality and/or any other sundry reason for hating is called bigotry. It's all terribly wrong but it's not all racist, and to say so is just, well, silly.

Yes you are correct. I did use the wrong word.

 

[CdnCarrie]

I think the part you are missing is the Bill of Rights. Society doesn’t decide what speech is acceptable or not. Not in a free society. Nor would anyone want that. Hate speech or any speech is protected. So if someone wants to be in a nation where speech is regulated. I could name a few..... No one is arguing right or wrong. Yet the freedom to express it.
The problem is you have a segment of society that labels people as a racist or etc. Just because they disagree with the opposing persons political opinion. It’s their way to silence an opposing viewpoint. When nothing that was said was racist or etc.

Who said I was referring to the USA?
Bigoted people are everywhere.

 

[Disneypro1]

Who said I was referring to the USA?
Bigoted people are everywhere.

We aren’t talking about who is bigots or not. We are talking about the right to express. And that some people LABEL people as a bigot or any term just because they disagree with that person political or religious viewpoint. When it wasn’t bigoted or anything negative. And how it’s silly for people to ask for apologies or try to silence the person that said it. Disagree with the person. Yes. But to try to silence them. Not good. But the main point is the segment of people acting outraged that say Ellen sat with Bush at a game. Asking her to explain that. Thankfully. She basically told them to pound sand. It’s not their business.

 

[CdnCarrie]

We aren’t talking about who is bigots or not. We are talking about the right to express. And that some people LABEL people as a bigot or any term just because they disagree with that person political or religious viewpoint. When it wasn’t bigoted or anything negative. And how it’s silly for people to ask for apologies or try to silence the person that said it. Disagree with the person. Yes. But to try to silence them. Not good. But the main point is the segment of people acting outraged that say Ellen sat with Bush at a game. Asking her to explain that. Thankfully. She basically told them to pound sand. It’s not their business.

I said nothing about political or religious viewpoints.
That has nothing to do with the points I was making.
I was talking about discrimination based on skin colour, ethnicity, gender, etc.
Nothing to do with who you voted for.

 

[SamFaniam]

That’s my point. There is a segment of society that would want that to happen. Regulate speech. Or thought police.
My point was. It’s even as bad though that people would want her taken off of the air for free speech. That is just wrong. Agree or not with her.
I don’t even watch her. But nothing she could say would bother me. Her right to. Life goes on.

The right to free speech means the government can’t arrest you for the things that you say. But it doesn’t mean anyone else has to listen to you, or give you a television show/radio program/website. The first amendment doesn’t shield you from consequences to your language. If people criticize you, or boycott your show, or you get banned from an Internet community, your free-speech rights aren't being violated. People have just figured out that you’re a jerk, and have decided that your jerkiness doesn’t deserve a forum.

 

[Disneypro1]

The right to free speech means the government can’t arrest you for the things that you say. But it doesn’t mean anyone else has to listen to you, or give you a television show/radio program/website. The first amendment doesn’t shield you from consequences to your language. If people criticize you, or boycott your show, or you get banned from an Internet community, your free-speech rights aren't being violated. People have just figured out that you’re a jerk, and have decided that your jerkiness doesn’t deserve a forum.

Well at least in the USA ,WE are the government. Citizens are. It’s not an entity. Second. The issue is there ARE people that want opposing political view points banned. Not just ignored. But banned in the name of hate speech or A fairness doctrine. When nothing was said was hate. Instead of simply disagreeing and moving on.... people call names and want the opposing viewpoint banned. Or silenced. I could disagree with someone all day. But would always support their right to say it. It takes a weak mind to want something silenced of one disagrees.

 

[SamFaniam]

Well at least in the USA ,WE are the government. Citizens are. It’s not an entity. Second. The issue is there ARE people that want opposing political view points banned. Not just ignored. But banned in the name of hate speech or A fairness doctrine. When nothing was said was hate. Instead of simply disagreeing and moving on.... people call names and want the opposing viewpoint banned. Or silenced. I could disagree with someone all day. But would always support their right to say it. It takes a weak mind to want something silenced of one disagrees.

We live in a society where in addition to free speech, many people value the elements of the free market.. And, sometimes, the result of you exercising your right to free speech is that the market reacts to that. It does not mean you cannot say what you wish, but people may decide that they’re not going to watch your show, or buy a ticket to your concert, or see your movie. This happens to people on both sides of the political spectrum. There may be some people who decide not to go to a Vince Vaughn movie, just like they were people who decided not to go to Kathy Griffin show. Wendy Williams can, of course, continue to say whatever she likes. But, it may mean that sponsors and advertisers are no longer willing to support her program, so she will no longer be paid for saying those things. I have not seen her program, but I am tangentially aware of the things she says. Her audience seems to enjoy that. If it ever reaches a point where she doesn’t have enough of an audience, she’ll no longer have a show. That’s the market exercising it’s right to free speech.

 

[Disneypro1]

We live in a society where in addition to free speech, many people value the elements of the free market.. And, sometimes, the result of you exercising your right to free speech is that the market reacts to that. It does not mean you cannot say what you wish, but people may decide that they’re not going to watch your show, or buy a ticket to your concert, or see your movie. This happens to people on both sides of the political spectrum. There may be some people who decide not to go to a Vince Vaughn movie, just like they were people who decided not to go to Kathy Griffin show. Wendy Williams can, of course, continue to say whatever she likes. But, it may mean that sponsors and advertisers are no longer willing to support her program, so she will no longer be paid for saying those things. I have not seen her program, but I am tangentially aware of the things she says. Her audience seems to enjoy that. If it ever reaches a point where she doesn’t have enough of an audience, she’ll no longer have a show. That’s the market exercising it’s right to free speech.

I agree with all of that. That’s certainly exactly right in a free market society. Which is the only society I would want to live in. I guess I am more talking about folks that want the speech banned. Meaning making it criminal. And those viewpoints do exist. It’s happening now or the attempt of at some universities and municipalities. Courts always strike it down. But the attempt my is still made.

 

[CdnCarrie]

I agree with all of that. That’s certainly exactly right in a free market society. Which is the only society I would want to live in. I guess I am more talking about folks that want the speech banned. Meaning making it criminal. And those viewpoints do exist. It’s happening now or the attempt of at some universities and municipalities. Courts always strike it down. But the attempt my is still made.

What does a free market have to do with speech? Free market has to with the economy not free speech.

And yes I think hate speech should be banned. You don’t?

Exactly what are universities banning? Can you give an example?

I’m referring to hate speech - saying something derogatory regarding skin colour or sexual preferences for example . That is hate speech . Yes it should be criminal behavior in my opinion.

I’m still unclear you are saying. A more specific example would be useful.

Calling someone a bigot isn’t hate speech. Calling someone a monkey based on their skin colour is.
The second statement should be criminal behaviour as it incites prejudice against a group of citizens. The first statement does not.

 

[sam_gordon]

I’m referring to hate speech - saying something derogatory regarding skin colour or sexual preferences for example . That is hate speech . Yes it should be criminal behavior in my opinion.

I disagree. No one should be able to legislate speech, except if it could be taken as a direct threat to someone's safety. If I say "I hate CdnCarrie." or "CdnCarrie should just curl up and die", I should be allowed to. But if I say "I'm going to kill CdnCarrie", that crosses the line. You can change your name to "blacks", "Muslims", "Jews", "Gays", "Christians", whatever.

Every time "Free Speech" comes up, I think of this...

.

Oh, and yes, I'm not convinced Wendy Williams should have a show. But that doesn't mean I think what she says should be illegal.

 

[Disneypro1]

What does a free market have to do with speech? Free market has to with the economy not free speech.

And yes I think hate speech should be banned. You don’t?

Exactly what are universities banning? Can you give an example?

I’m referring to hate speech - saying something derogatory regarding skin colour or sexual preferences for example . That is hate speech . Yes it should be criminal behavior in my opinion.

I’m still unclear you are saying. A more specific example would be useful.

Calling someone a bigot isn’t hate speech. Calling someone a monkey based on their skin colour is.
The second statement should be criminal behaviour as it incites prejudice against a group of citizens. The first statement does not.

No speech should be banned. And in the end at least in the US. It won’t be. Supreme Court would strike that down.
As for universities. They have tried to ban certain groups based on their political beliefs. Say anti abortion. It’s usually ends up in court and the court of course sides with free speech. Another university tried to say a gun rights group inspired hate. Which is insane. Again, they gun rights group won in court. Which is and always will be a constitutional right.
Again though. There are people willing to give up a “endowed by our creator” just as the founders worded it ... right...all ten of them. solely because that group deems it offensive.
I don’t care what speech is. It shall always be protected. That’s fundamental in the States. Not so much in say North Korea.
As for free market. Just means if a person say has a tv show and says things you think are hate. But if advertisers want to pay for ads to keep them on. That’s free market. Or if no one pays for the ads.... they’ll get cancelled.
If I don’t like what someone is saying on tv or radio. I turn it. Simple. But I would never take that right away. That’s not freedom. And not what our Constitution assures. People have the right to express their beliefs. Whether you or me or anyone else agrees. When we give someone else the power to take away speech based on what they think is bad or not. That’s a slope where in the end. We all lose freedoms.
In Los Angeles. They tried to ban wearing red or blue hats at sporting events because it may incite violence. In 1992 Due to Gang colours. Well that got tossed in court. You can’t tell people what to wear no more than what to say or think.

 

[dish rag]

Lots of free speech being shut down by Universities. I thought that was common knowledge.

 

[Disneypro1]

Lots of free speech being shut down by Universities. I thought that was common knowledge.

It is. Especially the private ones. At least public universities end up losing that battle in court. It’s sad that at one time you got an education in college. Now it’s an indoctrination to many. Think like “Us” or you will be labelled a bigot, hater or even worse... someone that likes the principles of this nation is considered by some racist... One good thing A lot of younger kids have fought that. I do see a light at the end of that tunnel.

 

[sam_gordon]

Lots of free speech being shut down by Universities. I thought that was common knowledge.

Are Universities part of the government? If so, I'm fine as long as they ban ALL speech. If not, they get to do what they want. Just like we can't talk politics or religion on the Dis.

 

[Disneypro1]

Are Universities part of the government? If so, I'm fine as long as they ban ALL speech. If not, they get to do what they want. Just like we can't talk politics or religion on the Dis.

Public ones. Like say Ohio State are tax payer funded. So they can’t ban any speech. If they do. They end up in a losing court battle. Private colleges have a bit more power to do so. Being private. But they still have to follow the Constitution. Sadly some think they don’t.

 

[luvsJack]

What does a free market have to do with speech? Free market has to with the economy not free speech.

And yes I think hate speech should be banned. You don’t?

Exactly what are universities banning? Can you give an example?

I’m referring to hate speech - saying something derogatory regarding skin colour or sexual preferences for example . That is hate speech . Yes it should be criminal behavior in my opinion.

I’m still unclear you are saying. A more specific example would be useful.

Calling someone a bigot isn’t hate speech. Calling someone a monkey based on their skin colour is.
The second statement should be criminal behaviour as it incites prejudice against a group of citizens. The first statement does not.

You would have to go back and read the posters’ full conversation to understand where the free market came in. The person you quoted wasn’t the one that brought it up.

In this country, we have freedom of speech. To ban what you or I perceive to be hate speech would be messing with that freedom and the Bill of Rights. While anyone saying anything out of hate is abhorrent, I, personally, am not willing to go down that particular road.

 

[CdnCarrie]

Lots of free speech being shut down by Universities. I thought that was common knowledge.

I work in an academic setting and nothing like that here.

Can you give me an example.

 

[dish rag]

I work in an academic setting and nothing like that here.

Can you give me an example.

Right. Not in Canada. Most have that mind set already here. So there is not much to shut down.

No, I don’t care to give you any examples.

 

[Disneypro1]

The academia setting explains some stuff.

 

[Disneypro1]

I can see this thread could have no end.... so
Time to press on. No point to keep it going from me.