[ExI] intolerant minds, a different flavor

[Lee Corbin]

BillK wrote:

> On 5/5/09, Lee Corbin wrote:
 >
>>  I also think that in the back of the minds of those
>>  who call for prohibitions on free speech lurks
>>  exactly the same kind of elitism. "You never know,"
>>  I can almost hear them saying, "how such memes may
>>  spread when picked up by the ignorant masses, and
>>  what woeful effects will result".
>>
> 
> I would lump this under 'etiquette' or 'how to behave properly in company'.
> 
> What sort of a society do you want to live in?

Well, one of the first answers that comes to mind is,
"one where one is permitted to say what he or she thinks".

> Do you want to live in a society where people 
 > behave like savages?

Certainly not. By "savages", I'll mean those who
have no respect for rule of law. But evidently
what you really mean is

 > Swearing, farting, belching, peeing in public,
 > rudely commenting on women present,...

All of which you wish to have outlawed? But
even more importantly, these have nothing to
do with *ideas*, or beliefs. The latter are
what is important; what do you think of the
"marketplace of ideas", anyway? Silly phrase?

I'm truly wondering if you are entirely serious
here, especially after your next lines

 > grabbing the best party food first, disparaging
 > other people, etc. etc.

Can you be seriously proposing that it be illegal
to disparage people?

 > Free speech is fine. But discuss your views only
 > with people who want to listen. Forcing your 'free
 > speech' on unwilling listeners is initiating
 > aggression towards them.

No, mouthing off on subjects can never properly, nor
ever should be confused with aggression.

(I'm willing to concede, just to get it out of
the way, that perhaps exceptions could be made
for mass media variations, although even there
I am very doubtful.)

Honestly, there is something quite humorous about
a modern society where someone says "X", and the
response is quick inhalation by everyone, the
police are called, and immediately cart off the
offender. Why? "Oh, because he said X!".

As Stefano was pointing out, in spirit, think of
where cryonics or even futurism itself would be
if the default in our societies were not freedom
of speech (when it concerns ideas and beliefs).
Think of where atheism might be!

Didn't arresting people for their beliefs and for
their statements go out with the coming of the
enlightenment? I can say that nothing I've ever
seen on this list surprises me as much as your
attitude, and of those that you (bravely) speak
for.

Lee