"New York Philosophy" Message Board › the billboard and free speech

the billboard and free speech

A former member
Post #: 270
Let's talk about that billboard that was taken down recently.

Was it right for people to complain about it?

I think people shouldn't be labeling something as free speech when 1. it's not in good taste
2. it's a blantant lie
3. it's promoting violence against people (as in racist
remarks).

Now in the billboard I think the lady there was in very bad taste but the guy was great. And the words in the billboard was the truth. It's not a lie.

Some people said it shouldn't be promoting divorce that that's why it should've be taken down as well.

Your opinions please.

And also please state when do you think there should be a censorship of free speech if any at all?
A former member
Post #: 121
Let's talk about that billboard that was taken down recently.

Was it right for people to complain about it?

I think people shouldn't be labeling something as free speech when 1. it's not in good taste
2. it's a blantant lie
3. it's promoting violence against people (as in racist
remarks).

Now in the billboard I think the lady there was in very bad taste but the guy was great. And the words in the billboard was the truth. It's not a lie.

Some people said it shouldn't be promoting divorce that that's why it should've be taken down as well.

Your opinions please.

And also please state when do you think there should be a censorship of free speech if any at all?

I don't know what billboard you are referring to, but the free speech issue is misrepresented these days as has become so much over the pst 100 years or so where rights are concerned.

From FDR in particular onwards, through to lawmakers of today rights are placed into issues where it does not belong.

Free speech is correctly Constutionally recognized between government and the individual. That is the sum total. In any instance outside of that, that is in the private domain, it is the right of the owner of the media entity to decide what they will or wont allow.

There can be no restriction on free speech because it is a right. The definition of free speech does not include advocating or encouraging action that violates individual rights. It is government's task to then act to protect.
A former member
Post #: 272
A law firm put up a billboard saying, "Life is short. Divorce." It showed a man I don't think that was offensive on how he was dressed but the lady was.

It was taken down because of a lack of a permit.

Alot of people said it was very offensive the words and the photography.


I was just wondering do you think it was promoting divorce? Well even at that what's the difference them advertising in a magazine for their services? It's no different. I think the commotion was for nothing about the words.
A former member
Post #: 125
A law firm put up a billboard saying, "Life is short. Divorce." It showed a man I don't think that was offensive on how he was dressed but the lady was.

It was taken down because of a lack of a permit.

Alot of people said it was very offensive the words and the photography.


I was just wondering do you think it was promoting divorce? Well even at that what's the difference them advertising in a magazine for their services? It's no different. I think the commotion was for nothing about the words.

Sounds like the usual social conservative judgement based on that individuals are weak and require a "guardian of morals".

Save us from the do gooders - for they pave a road to a life of hell for people.

I dont think it was promoting divorce for the sake of it - but encouraging people to seek happiness. What exactly is the point of a person remaining in a realtionship that is all form but bereft of substance?

The pursuit of happiness is the most important thing in life and I do not mean frivolous pursuits but a fundamental, guiltless discovery and attainment of goals in all aspects of one's life.

Without knowing the situation behind the obvious I encourage people and companies to stand up to the moralist bullies [in American usually the religious right] and stand their ground.

The sign should have remained.

Thomas Jefferson declared to the effect that it was tolerating that which you DISagreed with, that showed one's embrace of free speech.

The religous right are no more tolerant than the Taliban.
Powered by mvnForum

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy