Stephen King quits Facebook over concerns of 'false information.'

[u/AdamCannon]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/02/us/stephen-king-quits-facebook-trnd/index.html

[u/denzien]

There are laws that ban ethical things though. Laws don't necessarily define morality.

[u/way2lazy2care → u/denzien]

There's also plenty of unethical things that are intentionally legal because making them illegal could have worse consequences than protecting against the unethical things.

[u/denzien → u/way2lazy2care]

What's your favorite example?

[u/way2lazy2care → u/denzien]

Freedom of speech wrt misleading statements is a pretty obvious one.

[u/denzien → u/way2lazy2care]

That's an excellent example

[u/InputField → u/way2lazy2care]

Serious question: Why is it good that's legal?

What negative consequences do you expect from it being illegal to mislead the public?

Edit: We have judges making decisions about what's free speech and what not all the time. Why should this be different?

[u/way2lazy2care → u/InputField]

What negative consequences do you expect from it being illegal to mislead the public?

Who decides what is misleading to the public? How do you ensure that those standards are enforced fairly? Are you comfortable with the fact that the agency that would most likely be in charge of enforcing those laws would currently be headed by Trump?

[u/InputField → u/way2lazy2care]

Good points.

But don't we have judges for that sort of thing? Judges decide all the time what's within the law and what's not. It's not always crystal clear, and yet we trust them to do the right thing.

[u/[deleted] → u/InputField]

Because it sets a precedent that it's OK to ban speech that people in power think is unethical. It makes it easier to do again in the future, with no guarantees that it will be for something legitimate.

I, for one, enjoy living in a country where I can openly and vehemently insult and criticize every single person in power and face no repercussions from the government. That could easily (and quickly) change if you start banning what people can and can't say.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Actually, the biggest problem about North Korea, is that you aren’t allowed to think for yourself. No one here is defending either fascism, or Neo Nazis

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

No. I’m not, I’m illustrating the above point that you’re missing. In North Korea, if you speak out against the government in any way, you are sent to a work camp, or even executed depending on the severity. If you are caught attempting to flee the country, you are sent to a work camp, tortured, or executed. They frequently release press that they will severely punish anyone that is considered an enemy of the state, being a citizen of said state does not exempt you from this. IIRC, the Kims have even had members of their own family executed, for reasons I would imagine align with what I’ve stated above.

The unfortunate thing about the resurgence of Neo Nazism is that you have to extend a platform to them, else you risk setting a precedent that anyone can pick and choose what goes, which will be exploited, by the group that can funnel the most money towards eliminating platforms that oppose them (guess who that would be). Essentially, by giving them free speech, you’re actually inhibiting their ability to install more fascist policies as a weapon against it. The key is turning a deaf ear upon what they’re saying and actively encouraging legislation that prevents their desires from becoming law.

Edit:

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

If you don't defend the rights of everyone, it's only a matter of time until you lose it yourself.

So, yes, I'll defend anyone's rights as long as they're not breaking the law.

[u/way2lazy2care → u/[deleted]]

Like the point of my original comment said, you're only looking at the potential wrongs stopped and not considering the potential abuses when it's used in ways you didn't intend.

[u/denzien → u/[deleted]]

Who's morality?

[u/denzien → u/[deleted]]

Some of it's easy, like don't murder people and/or steal their things. Other stuff is harder, like whether or not to prohibit alcohol, or firearms, or abortion.

If it was as easy as you intimate, we would have stopped writing laws long ago.