| |
|
• speech which causes mental harm – majority of cases.
• Speech which leads to physical harm eg:
- free speech may allow the most stupid people to be let into a bunker (through
democracy) to save a determinate number of people
• sticks and stones may hurt my bones but words will never hurt me –
mental harm can be more effective on a person than physical harm
• racism – is it right to be racist in an environment where there
is no-one who will take offence – doesn’t harm anyone directly but
spreads the attitude around society which does cause harm
• if we want religion, we should also allow free spech ie. We arent discriminatory
against religion who (in some cases) have such radical views. Why should we
be discriminatory about what people say? We must be consistant.
• Free speech should be allowed unless a person uses it knowingly causing
harm to others
• What effect does it have on children who overhear discriminatory language
• Laws against free speech where it harms someone but how do you judge
when it does actually cause harm. Would this solve the problem of eg. racism
– would people just then go around being two faced
• Peoples opninions are the lifeblood of democracy
• Should censorship be allowed
- exposure of children to violence, racism and pornography
- people have the freedom to choose what they eatch/read etc.
Aron
Created 03:03:04