Religious groups ‘to sue mayor’ over ex-gay London bus adverts - PinkNews.co.uk I don't understand how people could be so genuinely horrible.
This is not a freedom of speech issue, these groups of bigots are free to buy their own buses and spread their lies to their hearts content. These are public buses, owned by a city that has strong policies against intolerance. Nobody has any right to advertise on them, and all ads are and should be screened and censored to comply with city policy. Unlimited freedom of speech is a very American concept, although many people in other countries may feel strongly about it. As a Canadian, I am a huge supporter of hate speech legislation. All rights have a limit, and when you exercising your right to freedom of speech begins to erode another persons right to life, liberty or the security of person, the right should be limited. In any case, these ads would not constitute hate speech, as they don't advocate violence or hatred towards a group, it just spreads lies about them.
Really? Tell me, what other advanced nation; within which LGBT share most or all the rights others have, also tolerate the bullshit spouted akin to the westboro creepist church among others? It doesn't happen. People like those, when they spout their hate, are arrested, tried and regularly convicted for their hate. Americans in particular are so wrapped up in the perceived notion that speech without borders as a right, that they fail to see the harm caused by the extreme of hatred, bigotry,racism and so on. In effect, they are so concerned about one right that they infringe on multiple rights of many people for this ONE right; that is constantly abused. I agree wholeheartedly with bradley with this, as I am also a Canadian, I do support strong hate speech legistlation; and I'm glad we as a nation do prosecute such things. There is of course room for improvement; but on the whole I am glad that we have the ability to put a stop the perpetuation of hate - as it is allowing such to continue without stopping it and showing it for the blind hatred it is, such hatred will always continue.
I do not believe in nationalism for the same reasons i don't believe in racism or classism and cannot agree to nationalistic profiling in such a way. More than profiling, it was a grand-sweeping exclusive assertion that "only an American would make such a comment" I must disapprove and suggest you rephrase with more reasoned words
Did anyone else notice that the spokesperson for the group (in the first article) specifically mentioned men as being the ones helped with therapy and such? Why does gay equal gay men, and gay women are an afterthought? Maybe I'm reading to much into this, but it bugged me when I read it...
I don't mean it as an insult or in a negative way, but the idea of inalienable rights without limit originates in the USA. The Bill of Rights makes no mention of any limitations on the rights contained within, and to date the courts have established very few limitations on freedom of speech in America (slander being one of the few examples). The Bill of Rights clearly states that: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech" Other nations take a different approach to entrenched rights. Canada for example, has a Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is similar to the Bill of Rights in that it guarantees certain rights. The big difference is the first line, which states: "The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society." Neither way is perfect, and I could argue the merits of both systems. I personally think that sometimes censorship is necessary, yet still completely respect the views of those who disagree. P.S. Canadian hate speech laws have prevented the Westboro Baptist Church and Ann Coulter from speaking publicly in Canada.
I wouldn't disagree with any of that, especially as it sounds as though you're well versed, it's the "only an american" part that bothers me. I think that's too pejorative and besides, is demonstrably not strictly true even if one can reasonably propose that a general trend to such attitudes exists in america and that they have different laws there. [edit] oh and by the way, my objection was only aimed at that part of alexandria's post, i like all of yours so far =)
it should be noted with the 2012 olympics months away, london has to keep its image up. Also, I thought england was one of the places that had no 'freedom of speech' law on the books.
Yes and no. Before 1998, freedom of speech in the UK was only established in law, so basically you could say anything as long as it was not illegal. There was no binding constitution or document that guaranteed it as a right. In '98, the UK signed onto the European Convention, which is a European charter of rights that included freedom of speech. UK has incredibly strict hate speech laws though, so there are still many exemptions to the charter.
I really hope someone tried to pull something like this in Austin. Because the graffiti on them would likely reach the 7th level of awesome.
Well, Show me another nation within which LGBT rights are valued that also shows issues regarding speech that Americans have. I am unaware of any. This of course does not count third world countries that have no LGBT rights, or those countries run by religious organizations. I call out Americans because Americans are the ones that are so conflicted with themselves - and in doing so screwing over the rights of ours and others within their borders - bent on defending ONE right while sabotaging the hells out of MULTIPLE rights. Im not attacking them - Im observing and pointing it out.
"The right of your fist ends at the right of my nose." I don't know who said it, but this is what we were taught in social class. Now, I'm aware that America is different from Canada, but since all I know is Canada that's what I'm gonna use. Basically that phrase means your rights end when you use them to harm others. So your right to free speech ends if what you are saying promotes hatred or violence against someone. Your right to free speech also ends if you are saying something slanderous or libelous. In Canada every right - even freedom of speech - has it's limitations. I don't agree with censhorship either, but we have to draw a line in the sand sometime and somewhere. It might as well be now. *Also on an unrelated note, Mogget what's your avi a picture of?
In the US all speech is free except for slander (and even then only under some circumstance) and direct incitement to violence.
it also should be noted that we have strict guidelines for proving slander. Alot of burden is placed on the plaintiff to prove that the speech was harmful to them.
