Quote:
Originally posted by xtreemmar1ne
any form of speech should be allowed, as long as it does not violate law.
|
By this standard, speech could be limited without restriction through legislation. I doubt this is what you meant to say. Perhaps "as long as it does not violate the rights of another" is more in line with your Mill quote.
I am very nervous when it comes to restricting personal expression. I understand that speech can be used to cause harm -- such as through libel -- and I think the state is justifying in restricting harmful falsehoods. Similarly, threats can have a negative coercive influence, and I think that they could also be limited by a certain extent. Lies for the purpose of defrauding others are another form of speech that intrudes on others' rights and are not acceptable.
Besides that, I believe banning hate-speech or seditious comments is unjustified. I believe people have a basic right to share their perspective, no matter how offensive it may be to other people or to the government. The state has no right to limit ideological discourse, even that which is outside societal or cultural norms.