Free speech and opinion- not tolerated today?

Ed Selley

In this instance, the venue in question is my head but for you oh king of non arguments, I have amended it to 'grow up.'

EarthRod

... Checkmate.

Ed Selley

A mighty victory Alan.

EarthRod

I have been called many things - but that takes the biscuit.

(Nearly reported you)

Trollslayer

Instances?

Enki

House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, dissenting voices of climate change on the BBC, need special permission, decreed year last Spring.  Lobbying Act 2014, look up who can and cant offer opinions during purdah period, all fine if you are cleared by sitting Government.

krish

The trouble with Watson has always been his big mouth. He wrote a lot of nonsense about Rosalind Franklin in The Double Helix that her contemporaries and friends would dispute (Crick was also unhappy about the book), and which she sadly couldn't respond to having passed away.

Really what did he expect, when claiming African peoples are of lower intelligence because of genetics, when most geneticists would never attribute such complex and non-physical phenotypes wholly to our genome, when there are so many other factors in their development. To make matters worse he indirectly suggested that this supposed intellectual deficit should be taken account of by social policy makers (by expressing concern that it wasn't).

He's the architect of his own downfall. Also can't forget that they surreptitiously worked on Franklin's very clear 'photo 51' in elucidating the structure of DNA.

Member 581642

Do you have a link to this as saw the report about recommendations from the committee about reporting climate change but nothing about who the bbc could and couldn't interview

Cliff

That's pretty much covered by our recent laws. And I agree we cannot tolerate hate preachers.
But that is the extreme.
Today, especially if you are well known you can be pilloried in the press, TV, Twitter for making a comment that does not pass the (2015) PC muster.
Intolerance seems to be the order of the day. Even sweet Charlotte Church had to apologise for the spitting incidents.

johntheexpat

I blame the internet.  Its an easy place to start an argument and create some interest for your day.  And then if you manage to take a pot-shot at a "big name" that hits a nerve with someone else, you feel like a victory has been scored.  One nil to you.

And then this attitude carries over to real life and we all see what happens.  People feel obliged to button their lips, so debate is curtailed and freedom of speech/opinion is quietly debased.

Like on here, there are those that I feel will take a view contrarian to mine, whatever I post, because its a laugh/gets their rocks off/they don't like some of my views, so they take against all of them by default/they are bored stupid and will do anything to engage in debate.  If it wasn't for the "ignore" facility, I wouldn't put up with their crap and would be here much less.

But you don't have an ignore button in real life.

Two plus two is four, in my opinion, if anyone wants to argue with that (without changing from a decimal system of numbering)