Author Topic: [UK EU Referendum] - UK VOTES LEAVE | 51.89% // 48.11%  (Read 48667 times)

the right to free speech is not the right to say whatever you want to whoever you want without consequences. just as you have the right to say something stupid, someone else has to right to tell you that what you said was stupid. and if you're talking about specific websites that may not allow you to say certain things, you never had that right in the first place
??? I don't understand where you got the assumption that I was referring to the internet.

 Obviously you can't make a call to violence without consequences but most anything else is fair game.

The reason the bill of rights was created in the first place was to clearly outline the natural rights of all citizens. The founding fathers weren't stupid; they knew people would challenge these rights eventually and that speech and communication would evolve in ways they couldn't begin to fathom. They wrote it down in such a way that it COULD NOT be challenged unreasonably. There are exceptions to it but generally you CAN say whatever you want provided you are not creating imminent danger or making a credible threat of violence.


did they think the referendum was just a joke? did they not realize that when they voted leave that their vote would actually matter?

Cringing at this post I made, so never mind.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2016, 09:13:32 AM by Doctor Disco »

re-rolling to get what you want is not how it works. Or at least that might be how it works now in Great Brit of tain.

like would we throw a re-election if Annoying Orange got voted president?

re-rolling to get what you want is not how it works. Or at least that might be how it works now in Great Brit of tain.

like would we throw a re-election if Annoying Orange got voted president?

I feel like we would, this isn't just the UK this is a global issue of morons not getting what they want

re-rolling to get what you want is not how it works. Or at least that might be how it works now in Great Brit of tain.

like would we throw a re-election if Annoying Orange got voted president?
you do realize that the petition was started by a pro-leaver under the assumption that remain would win, right

what you're saying isn't any less untrue, but I'm not sure if you're aware

you do realize that the petition was started by a pro-leaver under the assumption that remain would win, right

what you're saying isn't any less untrue, but I'm not sure if you're aware
Yep. But i have to say if you were dedicated to voting the way you did in the initial get-go then you better be ready to face the consequences if you win.


??? I don't understand where you got the assumption that I was referring to the internet.

 Obviously you can't make a call to violence without consequences but most anything else is fair game.

The reason the bill of rights was created in the first place was to clearly outline the natural rights of all citizens. The founding fathers weren't stupid; they knew people would challenge these rights eventually and that speech and communication would evolve in ways they couldn't begin to fathom. They wrote it down in such a way that it COULD NOT be challenged unreasonably. There are exceptions to it but generally you CAN say whatever you want provided you are not creating imminent danger or making a credible threat of violence.
yeah i think he was mostly talking about the people who whine and say their freedoms are being oppressed when people disagree with them or call them out for being an starfish

as in, just because you have the right to say what you want doesn't mean you're protected from consequences socially or otherwise, and when those consequences come, you can't blame other people, because those consequences are a result of your own actions.

"I voted not knowing what I actually voted for"
While this is with a joke tone, this highlights a giant problem I have with the EU referendum. No matter as complex, long-term and influential as this should be decided with a public referendum. People have no idea what they are voting for even and are easily entranced by the populistic approach that the leave campaign took: just tearing things down for the sake of doing so without an actual plan.

I mean jfc, the migration issue, for example. That was the largest selling point along with that we will retain access to the free market. The forget you think you're promising? Your plan is to drop all obligations towards the EU, but not lose the biggest benefit that is the free market? You can't deport current EU migrants either, because you will face retaliation from the origin countries and your 2-something million people living abroad in the EU will be sent back as well. Now that you left the EU, refugees will also get across from France-siding cbrown town more easily. You also can't send those migrants back to syria for example, because sending civilians into a warzone against their will is an international crime.

Absolute loving brainfreeze on the UK part.

Somebody in Europe or Scotland save Liverpool for god's sake. We didn't ask for this stuff

Obviously you can't make a call to violence without consequences but most anything else is fair game.
There's actually like a dozen other instances where non-violent free speech is restricted by the government. You can't express yourself in any way you want while attending public schools, you can't create libel against someone, and you can't broadcast certain types of profanity over the airwaves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions

They've also got some pretty strict laws in Germany banning national socialist symbolism:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verwenden_von_Kennzeichen_verfassungswidriger_Organisationen
From Deutsche Strafgesetzbuch 86a.