Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Freedom of speech

168 replies

puzzleduck · 06/01/2014 16:46

Did anyone see BB last night?

I dont know their names but a man was telling a woman that he didnt agree with people being Gay because its written in the Bible that its not allowed. He got a verbal warning from BB for this conversation.
AIBU to think that we have freedom of speech in this country and as he was only stating that HE didnt agree with it they should not have given him a VW.

OP posts:
nennypops · 06/01/2014 17:13

The trouble with allowing people like this a public platform to say what they think is that it then allows lots of other hate-filled homophobic idiots to go round proclaiming that their views are thereby validated and vindicated.

17leftfeet · 06/01/2014 17:14

Can someone make my link clicky please?

I'm on my phone and not sure how to do it

sunshinemmum · 06/01/2014 17:15

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

WestieMamma · 06/01/2014 17:16

Not so, WestieMamma. We have freedom of speech, we simply have some entirely sensible restrictions preventing speech likely to stir up hatred on various grounds including race, disability, gender and sexuality; plus quite limited restrictions preventing defamation.

Eh? It's free but restricted. So that would be not free then.

nennypops · 06/01/2014 17:17

Duly linked clip:
m.youtube.com/watch?v=VkGs63qGPJY

17leftfeet · 06/01/2014 17:19

Thank you nenny

MaidOfStars · 06/01/2014 17:19

"I don't agree with people being gay" (whatever that means) = he should be allowed to say that (and the programme makers can issue a clear disclaimer that this is the view of the participant and not of the programme makers or anyone else involved). He simply makes himself look like an ill-educated, ill-informed wankbadger. This type of remark should be openly scoffed at by those around him.

"I don't think gay people should have equal rights to marriage" = he should probably be allowed to say that (and again, the programme makers can issue a clear disclaimer that this is the view of the participant and not of the programme makers or anyone else involved). However, this should not go unchallenged by people around him who feel differently - why does he to think gay people should have equal rights to marriage?

"I think gay people should be put through therapy" = he should not be allowed to say that.

That's my take anyway.

nennypops · 06/01/2014 17:20

Westie, you said "In the UK you can think what you like but you have no right to inflict those thoughts on other people." As I pointed out, that is incorrect. Saying that there are a very few reasonable restrictions does not equate to "no right to inflict those thoughts on other people".

MaidOfStars · 06/01/2014 17:21

Second para, final line - why does he think gay people should NOT have....

nennypops · 06/01/2014 17:21

So, having looked at the clip, he said that homosexuality is wrong and abnormal; it's a choice; and it equates to a physical handicap. If that isn't prejudiced and homophobic, I don't know what is.

Juliaparker25 · 06/01/2014 17:25

First they came for the Jews and I said nothing I am not a Jew
Then they came for the Gypsy's and I said nothing I am not a Gypsy

Curbing free speech is a slippery slope or are you lot really Nazis

Except UKatlast .........A shining bolt of sense ..........

MaidOfStars · 06/01/2014 17:30

he said that homosexuality is wrong and abnormal; it's a choice; and it equates to a physical handicap.

Unfortunately, as much as I despise this viewpoint (not least because because it's not based on any kind of fact, as far as I know), I think, as his opinion, he should be allowed to express it.

We can educate/reject/mock/ignore as appropriate.

What crosses the line between this and speech that should definitely not be free is the expressed desire to act on such opinions.

Giyadas · 06/01/2014 17:30

first they came for the homophobes...
then they came for the racists...
then they came for the sexists...
...then, things were fine. I don't feel obliged to defend hate speech. Besides he only got a verbal warning, the government didn't smash down his door and drag him away, which is really what free speech is all about. If he wants to create a blog and slag off gay people he is free to do so to his hearts content.

Sirzy · 06/01/2014 17:35

Julia - surely your quotes are more an argument as to why BB where right to openly show they didn't agree with his viewpoint and didn't want him talking in such a way on national tv?

nennypops · 06/01/2014 17:35

But, MaidOfStars, the problem is that people don't get educated by this. As I said, the result of someone spouting forth these views on a public platform is that a load of other homophobes decide that they have been validated and they go round expressing their stupid views all the more. And that then leads to bullying, more prejudice and outright discrimination, and in the final analysis to gay-bashing attacks and worse.

ErrolTheDragon · 06/01/2014 17:36

The bloke wasn't 'censored' - that would mean that they removed what he said from the program. Clearly they didn't or we wouldn't be discussing it. He was warned not to continue with this line on this program.

Juliaparker25 · 06/01/2014 17:43

Agreed Sirzy

redshifter · 06/01/2014 17:50

I am bisexual myself.

I think Holyfield's comments were ridiculous and horrible.

However it really, really upsets me that he was censured for expressing his beliefs.

I don't care what the beliefs are or how disgusting they are. I want people to be able to express their beliefs.

Just my opinion but I feel very strongly about this.

MaidOfStars · 06/01/2014 17:52

But, MaidOfStars, the problem is that people don't get educated by this.

Well, I think his conversation partner might have missed a trick there. She opted out of the conversation, instead of engaging (ugh, I know it's horrible to engage idiots) and making him look like a fool.

Sirzy · 06/01/2014 17:53

If he had been censored for them then we would never have heard them. Channel 4 made the choice to show what he had said but then make it very clear that they did not condone what he was saying.

Alisvolatpropiis · 06/01/2014 17:53

Freedom of speech is all encompassing until your freedom offends others, particularly those with protected characteristics.

That is right.

Freedom of speech doesn't cover being racist,homophobic or sexist. For which we should all be eternally grateful.

MurderOfGoths · 06/01/2014 17:53

For all those saying it's restrictive and wrong to tell people what opinions they can express, do you think that his freedom to spout bollocks say what he thinks trumps the right of the programme makers to decide what gets said on their programme?

redshifter · 06/01/2014 17:58

I didn't say he was censored. I said he was censured. They is a difference.

do you think that his freedom tospout bollockssay what he thinks trumps the right of the programme makers to decide what gets said on their programme - Err, yes I do think this.

ErrolTheDragon · 06/01/2014 18:00

It was CaroBeaner who said 'censored'.

Dawndonnaagain · 06/01/2014 18:01

It was a hate speech. Just because it wasn't delivered with anger, vitriol and volume doesn't make it anything other than a hate speech. Much as I hate Big Brother and all that it stands for, they were right.