Freedom of Speech exemptions in the United States and in Canada

Robot Seb: Freedom of Speech exemption policies across North America courtesy of Wikipedia,

As a former investigative journalist in college, I had to learn these policies years ago before I was allowed to publish articles in our school newsletter. Hopefully this will help clarify exactly what it means which is often misinterpreted.


- USA - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_by_country

"In the United States freedom of expression is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. There are several common law exceptions including obscenity, defamation, incitement, incitement to riot or imminent lawless action, fighting words, fraud, speech covered by government granted monopoly (copyright), and speech integral to criminal conduct. There are federal criminal law statutory prohibitions covering all the common law exceptions other than defamation, of which there is civil law liability, as well as making false statements (lying) in "matters within the jurisdiction" of the federal government, speech related to information decreed to be related to national security such as military and classified information, false advertising, perjury, privileged communications, trade secrets, copyright, and patents. Most states and localities have many identical restrictions, as well as harassment, and time, place and manner restrictions. In addition, in California it is illegal to post a public official’s address or telephone number on the Internet."


- Canada - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_Canada

"“Limits on speech were incorporated in the criminal code in relation to treason, sedition, blasphemous and defamatory libel, disruption of religious worship, hate propaganda, spreading false news, public mischief, obscenity, indecency and other forms.

Libel involves publication in some permanent form like writing in a book, newspaper, and slander Defamation is a tort that gives a person the right to recover damages for injury due to publication of words that were intended to lower a person’s character. The law therefore encourages the people in mass media to publish with caution, to avoid any forms of slander and to respect a person’s freedom of expression."

Robot Seb: The way it was explained to me made a lot of sense and is something which really did improve my writing style. Try not to think of these as limits or censorship as it's just placing limits on what you allow yourself to express. Instead think of these as "non-applicable" so Free Speech works but it doesn't apply to the stuff mentioned.

This is where being constructive comes into play as you can still express the idea you want to express as long as it's supported by facts, reasoning, and logic. Here's an example:

Bad approach
- "That person is a **** for buying an electric car and taking it for a drive out in the desert then getting stuck, what the hell was he thinking?!"

Good approach
- "Due to the lack of e-vehicle recharging stations in the region, the decision to venture out into the unknown eventually lead to the vehicle running out of power which showed a lack of foresight in locating a charging station within the vehicle's range of travel beforehand."

One approach is insulting and a bit degrading thus wouldn't be published while the other approach is supported by facts and logic which would be allowed to be published. It's all about how the message is conveyed that makes a big difference.

needpeace6:

Most Valuable Player:

duncan124:
Just goes to show how retarded the Berliners are when trying to get away with their offences.

Even German TV has to show the German world as seen by Germans.

Try;- wwitv for a germanTV.

needpeace6: Share!!

Succinct Verbosity: Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Privacy are interesting, especially within the EU where there are laws that explicitly protect both, perhaps at the expense of another.

near50ohoh: i think ur only as free as you allow others to be and considering some of the views expressed on the net, there arent many truly free people. it's one thing to politely debate an issue. its another to slag the person or call them names (beyond idiot maybe)
yes you are free to say what you wish in ur own home,or within ur own group of soul mates. but sometimes the opinions you express have real world consequences to others. life and death consequences at that.so pls at least attempt to be liberal in ur public views. as is written into cdn law, hate mongering is intolerable. and should be deleted!!

Mercers Love: Important thing to ask!Why is Freedom of speech NOT allowed or Tolerated by Wire Club??

near50ohoh: and i think it bends too far sometimes to allow it. when defamatory and hurtfully wrong things are said about groups of people they are not a member of. that are already disenfranchised enough.

soylent_green_1973: "Hurtfully wrong" is a subjective assessment. For example, a Christian can claim I'm being hurtfully wrong when I tell them God is an imaginary being. A Muslim can claim I'm being hurtfully wrong when I say the Q'uran is not 100% true.

near50ohoh: fair enough. maybe i did express myself wrongly.but unless i discuss faith in generic terms, the only expressions i make are in favour of others or actually against my own and only in regards to the fanatics. but i do tread the line where what i would say would or could cost someone their life. or be bashed due to my words. this is a public forum.i expect some disagreement esp in faith questions. i dont expect people to attack!! esp if they claim to be believers of love and peace.

soylent_green_1973: I've been suspended from wireclub by moderators many times for simply ridiculing religion. I insulted Allah and Jesus and Moses. I wasn't insulting people.That's a pathetic reason to suspend a chatter as far as I'm concerned.

MichaeI: At Wire, politeness and civility will always trump freedom of speech. Our jobs as moderators is to keep the chat rooms peaceful which it clearly states upon room entry.

near50ohoh: i prefer discussing the ideals and moral practice as a comparative analysis. i find i tread dangerous ground when i discuss the prophets or history as individual faiths. he who knows little and discusses much is condemned to die in ignorance.

soylent_green_1973: Oh, so according to moderator Michael, a chat room like Religion is where people should just give huggles to everyone and high five the religious, no matter how ridiculous, misogynistic, bigoted or cruel their faiths are.

Robot Seb: Religion Chat = G-rated

"This is a moderated chat room. Our friendly Moderators might be present in order to keep this room clean and peaceful at all times. Please read and follow the rules of conduct.

This is a G-rated chat room. All conversations must be polite, respectful and free of profanity."

...so in other words, yes soylent however it is under the admin's discretion.

Robot Seb: Just to clarify, moderators do not make the rules. The admins make the rules, moderators help people while also enforcing the rules and policies of this establishment in order to maintain a safe & pleasant atmosphere for all users to enjoy.

MichaeI: Just a tip: There's an Atheism room where you can rant and rave all you want to with like minded people.

Inspector Ninja: Its not particularly reasonable to label atheists as ranting and raving, its somewhat more to the line of bigotry and in fact grossly unfair.

Atheists have as much a stake in the discussion of religion as the faithful and shouldn't be excluded for their beliefs or lack thereof. Isn't that the point of discussion, chat, conversation? We share our thoughts and beliefs with each other. I'm disappointed that such a negative line is taken with chatters for wanting to express themselves.

Just a case in point, if someones faith clashes with the faith of another, which they often do, how is that any different to a similar clash with an atheist?

near50ohoh: it's not whether or not you believe , it's how you express your position that i often take exception with. you mock what you don't believe in and belittle people and their faith as a group that you aren't part of. that makes you a bigot.
i say feel free to express your point of view any where you choose but do it without the vulgarity, mockery and rage. please. that's what i would ask if it were my thread and/or i had the power to edit out any comments made. (oh i do often wish for it). disagree all you want, but do it with intelligence and respect. that's all i would ask if i had the power. it's then you will be welcome any where you go in life.
yes this is free to all with all access, but behave. this is a public forum after all.

If the stars fell: people want special rights and special privileges... based on ideology, often.... its kind of strange to me how someone can have a difference of opinion about a global topic and be banished... but a troll can manipulate and abuse as much as they want to with no fear of punishment... if you really want to engender an atmosphere of positivity... you should probably stop taking sides... because i see it all the time, and no one does squat about it

near50ohoh: refraining from taking sides on an issue that you have deep feelings about is improbable.arguing in a way that shows respect for those around you is actually quite easy and isnt asking for special privileges either. it's all part of being civilized in our social groups.
as for trolls causing trouble? sometimes, the people called trolls are just newbies trying to find their place and old timers hating the new vibe.
.this is not your living room with your friends over. it is a public room.

If the stars fell: perhaps you havent experienced it enough to know, there is definitely a level of favoritism going on, wether anyone admits it or not... and yes people want special priviliges, they want to be able to go somewhere and only talk to people that agree with them, and are appalled that they might meet someone that disagrees, contesting anyones belief system isnt inherently hostile... if you want to go somewhere where people you dont want to talk to cant come and question your basis for morality, make your own room. Atheists have just as much a right to be involved in a conversation about religion as anyone else... just because you dont like what they think doesnt mean they are being vindictive...

near50ohoh: it doesnt have to be vindictive anyway. i would like to note that some disagreement has occurred in this thread and for the most part has not resorted to name calling and profanity. see? it can be done!! you should know btw, i'm often the piggy in the middle.