[ExI] intolerant minds, a different flavor

[Lee Corbin]

BillK wrote:

> On 5/7/09, Lee Corbin wrote:
 >
>>  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!".
>>
>>  Didn't arresting people for their beliefs and for
>>  their statements go out with the coming of the
>>  enlightenment?
> 
> The range of 'free speech' is very wide.
> 
> Some just makes you obnoxious. A very small selection will get you arrested.
> 
> The noisy neighbor problem is just his 'free speech', but it reduces
> your quality of life. I would certainly call that aggression. And in
> most jurisdictions you can take legal action to restrict his behavior.

No offense, but it does seem that you systematically
invoke examples where it's not the beliefs and the
content of statements that are at issue.

Here, for example, you conflate a noisy neighbor with,
oh, say me expressing disdain for some religious movement
(but doing so politely and quietly), or me wondering
out loud whether or not a certain policy by should be
enacted or not, or me wondering whether in fact some
claimed historical incident in fact did occur.

You see the difference? (Yes, I'm the first to say
that neighbors ought not have the legal right to
play very loud music, or behave in ways that annoy
their neighbors---it's just that the expression of
beliefs or ideas (suitably done) ought not be
prohibited. Period.)

 > If you try to board a plane while making jokes
 > about bombs and terrorists, you will be arrested.

As we slowly recover from the state of war mentality,
this too should cease. If not before.

But again---it's besides the point. An airline in
principle should be able (in my opinion) to prohibit
swearing, or the making of jokes about the company
president's wife, or whatever. This is totally
different from suppressing political dissent or
making (at proper times that don't inconvenience
anyone) unpopular historical or philosophical
statements *illegal*.

 > What is theoretically your 'right' has to be
 > restricted by the pressure of living with other
 > people. In many cases, just walking out the room
 > will be sufficient, when someone starts loudly
 > proclaiming strange opinions. Leave them to the
 > company of their own beliefs.

Yes, that's more like it! But to make such statements
*illegal*? Are you really sure that that's what you
want?

 > But social behavior laws are made to attempt to raise the security and
 > quality of life of society. If you want anarchy and the right to
 > behave exactly as you please,

Again, behavior is one thing. The mere voicing of
ideas another.

Lee

 > then you have to find a society that
 > agrees with you. If you remain in a
 > society with different rules, then
 > you will get into trouble for breaking
 > the rules. That's life.