View Single Post
Old 05-15-2004, 05:10 PM   #10 (permalink)
HarmlessRabbit
Junkie
 
HarmlessRabbit's Avatar
 
Location: San Jose, CA
Quote:
Originally posted by irateplatypus
if you recognize that free speech is limited by standards of public decency, then this is simply an enforcement of those standards. the protester wasn't denied speaking his message, he was denied because he was using a method that was deemed offensive within the context of a public demonstration. if you allow for measures of enforced decency, then platteville has the authority to deny this man this way of delivering his message.

if you do not recognize that free speech has limits according to decency, then the logical extention of your argument is that all things are appropriate at all times. don't say that the most extreme cases (such as... a pornography shop next door to an elementary school) aren't applicable, because if you do you are enforcing your standards of what is publicly acceptable on someone who chooses to go farther than you would (just as this man is choosing to go farther than the platteville police would like).

so, you're forced to either accept that the police were within their right to take his sign down... or you maintain that all speech is appropriate everywhere.

if choose to not accept the first while denying the second, then you're effectively putting your measure of what is acceptable over everyone elses... something you're displaying as something negative about the situation you cited.
My god, I can only imagine the poor grocers in jail in that city for carrying "Make 7 UP YOURS" signs in their stores. WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN.

"Community standards" is a slippery slope. Personally, I choose to err on the side of free speech, but I do agree that free speech has limits. For example, I'm all for mandatory internet filtering in libraries and schools (with the option for adults to turn it off). I'm hoping my daughter doesn't get goatse'd until she is a teenager.

And let's not forget FCUK
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/fcuk.asp
with stores in malls with slogans like "fcuk at home", "fcuk in bed", and "fcuk him". They even have a children's line!

If the city enforces standards uniformly, fine, but if they are arresting this guy for a "F U G W" sign, and they aren't arresting Target for "FCUK" shirts, then they are stifling political speech under the guise of community standards.
HarmlessRabbit is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360