General thoughts on freedom of speech

Lads, I accidentally talked my way into writing a paper for my university's newspaper regarding freedom of speech and how Sup Forums is somewhat like the polar opposite of PC culture and censorship. Does anybody have anything interesting to say about this?

Other urls found in this thread:

nationalpost.com/news/politics/hate-speech-no-longer-part-of-canadas-human-rights-act
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Unironically kys faget

Nice speech needs no protection. Loving speech needs no protection. What you call hate speech, I call the truth.

You don't have freedom of speech.

Speech should be outlawed completely, no one has ever tried that before and it's obvious at this point that this whole speech thing isn't working we should all try to be quiet for a while we'd get along better.

All you'd have to do is make it legal to kick someone in the groin for talking. And if you wear armour, you go to jail.

That's a perfectly fine statement. Is there a reason why I should do this?

Not your personal army

Because you made a shitty thread

I'm not asking for that you mongoloid. We talk about this shit all the time but I figured that I might as well be honest about what I'm trying to do. Maybe somebody wants to say something in particular that I could add for the normies to read.

You're writing an article about Sup Forums. Tell your readers to "fuck off, we're full".

Clearly this isn't the most original thread given that all you cucks talk about is jews and Trump, but basically I'm looking for a more abstract discussion.

The problem with limiting speech on the basis of offense (banning hate speech) is that you could in the process ban stating something that is literally true, despite being insensitive (Being obese is unhealthy for example).

But unrestricted speech also creates problems where people gain harm each other at very little cost (slander, libel, inciting hatred, etc)

What would solve this issue is some apolitical (legalistic) means of determining what is truthful speech and protecting your right to say that.

That is, you could say anything you want, but you would also have to be able to provide justification for your claims (or at least document your due-diligence of trying to falsify what you said).

If it could be proven with available information that what you said was false, it would be illegal speech.
If it could not be proven with available information that what you said was false, it would be legal speech.

>he thinks he's a smart guy

We have a question for people like that. You're Canadian, so tell me the loophole that enables people under the age of eighteen to vote. If you actually know anything about politics, it's easy, but good luck googling it.

make sure to mention that canada repealed Section 13 of the Human Rights Act and there has been no convictions for (((hate speech))) since 2013 and there were VERY few before that (zundel was one of 5). leafs technically have the freedom of speech despite (((common))) knowledge on Sup Forums unlike the cucked bongs who are now going to jail

wrong
>nationalpost.com/news/politics/hate-speech-no-longer-part-of-canadas-human-rights-act
link related

ah-bloo-bloo

>leaf
>draging Sup Forums into real life
>writing a paper on it

you're the Sup Forumsitical equivalent to all those faggots who made /mlp/ony presentations in school

just neck your self faggot

one big flaw with that

you can just claim to be a chick and be freed from it since chicks don't have a groin
it would atleast work in your commie shithole

oh you can kick girls too

Post boipucci, faggot

be sure to mention implied consent in regards to having sex with dogs.

you could say that pure free speech is a danger to niggers or something like that but then say it might also help niggers but who the fuck knows because the kikes run everything anyway

If freedom of speech let me post shit like this, then I all for it.

All I did was rattle off one day that I thought that the Internet (and places like Sup Forums for example) was one of the only places where free speech has a chance. Then one of the editors thought it was a good idea to write about because it's currently a big topic of public discourse.