It should all be free speech.
FCC wants free broadband service, plus content filtering
...
There will be one more requirement for the service. A spokesperson for the Commission has told Ars that the FCC wants it to include "content filters." For what? We asked. "To protect children," came the reply.
I believe there are instances where restrictions on free speech are justifiable in a free and democratic society.
No it can't, once you introduce the "hate speech" label into the law and have that category subject to different treatment it diminishes free speech.
It should all be free speech.
I deliberately wrote 'should', how things ought be in principle is different from the practical. I would not define myself as an absolutist, there are points where freedom of speech may deny what I (and society in general) considers fundamental rights.I disagree with both of you.
I believe there are instances where restrictions on free speech are justifiable in a free and democratic society.
Just like those restrictions reasonably placed on other forms of freedom, like the freedom of expression, freedom of religion, etc.
I think that speech reflects a hateful sentiment, but if I was to categorise it I would go with protected free speech.Really?
So all ******* should die!
Is that free speech or hate speech?
What's your opinion on the Maclean's case?I believe there are instances where restrictions on free speech are justifiable in a free and democratic society.
It becomes a contradiction with arbitrary laws introduced to pander to certain sections of the community.free speech is a cop out
it's identifying how difficult it is to draw a line to what is justifiable and what isn't and not wanting to deal with this
the law has no problem restricting whatever bit of freedom when it sees fit
the entire "free speech" thing is such a contradiction to everything else in law and society that it basically is just laughable