Kialo requires cookies to work correctly.
There should be no limit to freedom of speech.
Censorship leads to narrow mindedness by preventing sincere and open discussion.
We need to teach people openness and tolerance, not forbid them from voicing their opinions.
Hearing counter arguments is more effective in fighting a harmful idea than just muting it.
Political correctness around speech has been gaining ground. This is harmful as it might stop people from addressing issues because they're afraid to insult/hurt an individual or group, even when they actually want to raise awareness to a genuine problem.
Restrictions on freedom of speech can be used to censor good and helpful ideas.
Hateful ideologies will be spread no matter what. It is safer to allow them into public discourse so they can be easily debunked, otherwise they will appear the victim and gain more sympathy.
Limits on freedom of speech diminish our humanity. It suggests that people will be unable to make good decisions, and it does not give the opportunity for people to make good decisions with the information we are given.
Censoring yelling fire in a theater does not lead to narrow mindedness, conformism, or prevent sincere and open discussion, so this is not a defense of all speech.
No limit on speech would allow irrational arguments and lies that may forbid followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, thus calling for and leading to hurtful action against others.
Paradox of intolerance
- Karl Poper
Harassment and bullying prevent sincere and open discussion by excluding people from the debate.
This is only true of very extreme censorship. All democracies have some censorship yet are still the most plural and free thinking societies.
Narrow-mindedness is the cause of censorship, not its effect.