Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: Craig234
-snip-
Stifling 'free speech' is irresponsible.
IMO, the guy is screaming *FIRE* in a crowded theater.
Furthermore, IMO, the right of free speach brings some responsibility to use it appropriately. His remarks
could become self-fulling and cause a lot of damage to a lot of people.
Note: I have absolutely no money myself in the stock market.
Fern
Over-analogizing the 'fire in a crowded theatre remark' leads to all kinds of bad things.
When the president and many others are saying that there ARE WMD and we have to protect our country, isn't it 'crying in a crowded theatre' to threaten the war effort by making baseless claims that maybe the war is not a good idea? If the president said that Saddam was behind 9/11, would you be providing aid and comfort to terrorists if you said he wasn't? If the market is about to crash, are you yelling fire in a crowded theatre to tell people the truth as you see it and not let only the 'insiders' plan for it, while they lie?
There's a value to free speech, and a price. Sometimes free speech is 'harmful', and sometimes it's wrong, but overall people who are democratically inclined notice that it has more benefit than harm and protect it, rather than grabbing short-sighted benefits by restricting it. Power likes to have as little challenge as possible, and restricting free speech helps it - and that helps lead to tyranny.
The antidote to lies, generally, is the truth, not censorship. Censorship may begin well-intentioned, but quickly has a new master and hides the truth.