Moderators: nyang, Dvivid, Inga, taiqiman
Monsoon wrote:In the UK we have free speech too,
There have been a few cases recently where people are awaiting trial for what they have said or have been bared from work or adoption or fostering due to relatively mild opinions.
However we must preserve freedom of speech and expression against all comers.
Monsoon wrote:There have been a few cases recently where people are awaiting trial for what they have said or have been bared from work or adoption or fostering due to relatively mild opinions.
Could you give some links for this please? It's not that I don't believe you, rather it may be the case that there is a difference between what you think is acceptable and what the state thinks is acceptable. I would like to see for myself before going out on a limb one way or the other.
Also,However we must preserve freedom of speech and expression against all comers.
... when such freedom also permits blatantly obvious hate speech (Westboro Baptists spring to mind) then I think there is every justification for some kind of check and balance. Total freedom to say what you want, how you want and to whom you want is not in the best interest of our current society. In an enlightened society it would work fine because people would be responsible for what they say. In our times the prevailing reasoning is that it always the other guys fault.
Freedom of speech WITHOUT the burden of responsibility is the path of cowardice.
This is not really the thread to discuss this.
Once you start attacking speech you don't like you have no freedom. Even if their opinion is unusual or unpleasant or against political consensus you still have to let them speak.
Monsoon wrote:
You see, this is the problem with free speech. People think it absolves them of any responsibility at all.
Take the vicar, for example,
Freedom of expression is not the same as freedom to deliberately and willfully cause distress to others. All the examples given caused unnecessary distress. Should this go unremarked upon? I think not. Should there be punitive action? That is a whole other question.
This isn't about speech that 'you don't like' it's about speech that is offensive in a targeted fashion. It also isn't about opinions that cut against the consensus. The majority of these cases are not examples of expressions of ideas but nothing more than mindless hate speech.
As I said in the earlier post, freedom of expression is great as an ideal. When we have a mature society then maybe we will be able to handle it properly.
What if the truth is offensive?
Monsoon wrote:I did say we would probably disagree on this
Perhaps we could make it simpler. You can have the freedom to be as deliberately offensive as you like to me, as long as the law gives me the freedom to punch you in the nose without charge. That sound fair?
Monsoon wrote:Personally I would at least try to behave equitably with others. If I give offence then I apologise immediately upon discovery irrespective of whether I feel I am right or wrong. I just find life is smoother this way.
chh wrote:John, you're just talking about offensive speech, right? Not discrimination in general...
Monsoon wrote:We're not coming at this problem from very different positions - even though there is some clashing!
In general I accept what you are saying and agree with it. However, when you talk about our current lack of moral virtue are you not defending my point about the immaturity of our society? As this is certainly what I was alluding too.
In the world of today, if you want to get in my face and scream abuse at me, do I not also have the right to deny you that access? Does your right to make noise exceed my right to have peace? Talking about how it actually is today and not how it should be.
Most days I walk from my work, past the local hospital and down to the supermarket to get lunch. Usually there are protesters outside the hospital campaigning against abortions. They don't bother me, I don't bother them. If any of them approach me directly I make it plain that their advance is unwelcome. We have no problems. If they were to follow me down the street haranguing me, then we would have a problem. Where is the line to be drawn in this?
Remember we are not talking about the time of Confucius, we are talking about the here and now, with all its warts and pustules.
Monsoon wrote: If I stand on the street corner waving a banner saying "Immigrants go home!" then I run the very real risk of inciting violence from the people I am targeting.
Greg Jah wrote: As to the original post by Monsoon, this is an area that I have struggled with for much of my life. Especially when I was younger, I would often start things with great enthusiasm but have a hard time finishing because my interest and energy started pulling me elsewhere. Right now I have pared my martial arts training down to three days a week of boxing/ FMA, and two days a week of concentrated Tai Chi practice (currently working on learning the Yang 108). I try to do 15 - 20 minutes of Qigong & Tai Chi practice each morning. I also try to do 20 - 30 minutes of meditation each day.
For me, the importance of a good instructor and good training partners cannot be overstated. I find that when I have both then my training is much more focused, and I get deeper into the art, than when I am left to my own devices.
Return to Taijiquan / Tai Chi Chuan
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests