Calling Canada's new proposed Online Harms Act Orwellian is unfair to Orwell. This is worse.. I channel the spirit of the late Christopher Hitchens to explain why.
Well written!! As you say, "It is a slippery road".
Whenever the issue of free speech is at hand, I'm reminded of what Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote in Abrams v. US, 250 U.S. 616 (1919):
"But when men have realized that time has upset many fighting faiths, they may come to believe even more than they believe the very foundations of their own conduct that the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas -- that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out... I think that we should be eternally vigilant against attempts to check the expression of opinions that we loathe and believe to be fraught with death, unless they so imminently threaten immediate interference with the lawful and pressing purposes of the law that an immediate check is required to save the country."
It's sad and in my opinion,that religions people who protest hate against anyone who is not delusional for example outside abortion clinics,may people, evolution denial and i have even seen footage of these religions nuts protest at a soldiers funeral and is going to hell and personally i think it's disgusting and the policecouldnot do anything.i support there right to speak there bull s$$t but as an atheist, though I think there words of hate,the very definition of the word hate does it change the worlds dynamics and how we live our lives when people speak there mind? and as much as I hate some people's free speeches and the hatred and or lies but these kind of people like me have my own thoughts but i just don't act on them but on the other end of the spectrum example trump where do we draw the line in what a person or persons say? But that is the most extreme end of the spectrum.but you can't police people's thoughts and speech and a possible criminal record for speaking there mind. What thoughts and speech should be illegal or legal? I'm currently writing a book on all religion's and there monopoly over politics,education and there many lies and contradictions. Should I not write this book in case I get arrested and I know every religion,politicians and just about anyone who finds evidence to much to fathom but saying that I'm well aware I have that freedom but getting published is also a hurdle of free speech and what is considered hate and dangerous ideas but it's only dangerous if you act out your interpretation of free speech turning into violence.
I agree with your analysis . I have a question inspired by what Sam Harris said in condemnation of Hamas immediately after the attack. Based on your essay, I understand that it is hate speech to say all Jewish people should be killed. Similarly, it is hate speech that all Palestinian people should be killed. Is it hate speech to say (I cannot recall the wording) that it is justifiable to kill even millions of Palestinians in defense of Israel because Hamas killed about 1200 Jewish people? I have no particular interests in the specific groups, they can be replaced by any two groups fighting each other.
Well written!! As you say, "It is a slippery road".
Whenever the issue of free speech is at hand, I'm reminded of what Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote in Abrams v. US, 250 U.S. 616 (1919):
"But when men have realized that time has upset many fighting faiths, they may come to believe even more than they believe the very foundations of their own conduct that the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas -- that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out... I think that we should be eternally vigilant against attempts to check the expression of opinions that we loathe and believe to be fraught with death, unless they so imminently threaten immediate interference with the lawful and pressing purposes of the law that an immediate check is required to save the country."
thanks... good quote.
It's sad and in my opinion,that religions people who protest hate against anyone who is not delusional for example outside abortion clinics,may people, evolution denial and i have even seen footage of these religions nuts protest at a soldiers funeral and is going to hell and personally i think it's disgusting and the policecouldnot do anything.i support there right to speak there bull s$$t but as an atheist, though I think there words of hate,the very definition of the word hate does it change the worlds dynamics and how we live our lives when people speak there mind? and as much as I hate some people's free speeches and the hatred and or lies but these kind of people like me have my own thoughts but i just don't act on them but on the other end of the spectrum example trump where do we draw the line in what a person or persons say? But that is the most extreme end of the spectrum.but you can't police people's thoughts and speech and a possible criminal record for speaking there mind. What thoughts and speech should be illegal or legal? I'm currently writing a book on all religion's and there monopoly over politics,education and there many lies and contradictions. Should I not write this book in case I get arrested and I know every religion,politicians and just about anyone who finds evidence to much to fathom but saying that I'm well aware I have that freedom but getting published is also a hurdle of free speech and what is considered hate and dangerous ideas but it's only dangerous if you act out your interpretation of free speech turning into violence.
I agree with your analysis . I have a question inspired by what Sam Harris said in condemnation of Hamas immediately after the attack. Based on your essay, I understand that it is hate speech to say all Jewish people should be killed. Similarly, it is hate speech that all Palestinian people should be killed. Is it hate speech to say (I cannot recall the wording) that it is justifiable to kill even millions of Palestinians in defense of Israel because Hamas killed about 1200 Jewish people? I have no particular interests in the specific groups, they can be replaced by any two groups fighting each other.
I don’t think it is justifiable to say that.