Panther
Gold Member
Offline
My Heart beats True for the Red White & Blue...
Posts: 11523
Gender:
|
Phemanderac wrote on Jan 24 th, 2015 at 11:54am: I think there is a gap between the "dictionary" meaning of the word freedom and the application of the word in terms of speech and expression...
That is where some of this apparent confusion/debate is coming from quite clearly.
The dictionary term after all does not mention any LIMITS and, in point of fact, does for all intent and purpose read as an absolute.... particularly this little gem,
"2. exemption from external control, interference, regulation, etc."
That would seem pretty "absolute" to me.
However, I also acknowledge that the stated definition of "Freedom of Speech" does have some stated "regulations" in it generally. This regulations depend on Government of the day and how they interpret them.... Still, it certainly suggests a bit of a lie to the use of the word freedom in association with speech and expression. I agree to a point.
There are regulations placed on the Freedom of Speech (along with remedies/penalties) by Governments (which in & of themselves are instituted to govern at our will, & by a rule of law we ourselves, or our forbearers, initially establish).
That said, when do those remedies/penalties get imposed?
Before you express yourself, or after you freely express yourself?
If you agree that it is only after the deed is done, then you would have to agree that the moment you expressed yourself you were expressing your Right to the Freedom of Speech.
The way I look at it, that Freedom is not absolute, might be (I'm not perfect, closer than yesterday, but not there yet ) better explained here:
Quote:
........The freedom that an individual or community or state seeks must be consistent with a similar freedom for other individuals, communities or states. National, economic, religious or cultural freedom expresses itself in and by means of the duality of existence. It lives on duality and is sustained by duality; therefore it has to be relative and limited and cannot be infinite. It exists in varying degrees. Even when it is won through persistent effort, it cannot be a permanent attainment, since the external conditions having once been secured are not secured forever but are capable of deteriorating in the course of time.
Now, that said, the Freedom of Speech was not bestowed upon mankind by any person, or by any government.
It is a 'Natural Right' bestowed upon man way before memory, the moment we first spoke, therefore our Freedom of Speech is unlimited/absolute.
Restricted maybe by government, but only after the fact that we have the 'Natural Right' to utilize it.
We can say it, we can express it, but we may be penalized for doing so.
We have to take a personal responsibility in making the choice to use it or not.
Government is powerless to stop you.
All they can do is attempt to deter you, or attempt to stop you from doing/saying something again.
|