Best 149 quotes in «free speech quotes» category

Free speech in Bangladesh can get you killed

Children are not being assaulted by images that appear on a computer screen. Any Internet user knows it is quite difficult to stumble across pornography.

Describing the Internet as the Network of Networks is like calling the Space Shuttle, a thing that flies.

Equally, the Internet interprets attempts at proprietary control as threats and mobilizes to defeat them.

Free speech is meaningless if the commercial cacophony has risen to the point where no one can hear you.

Because if you don't stand up for the stuff you don't like, when they come for the stuff you do like, you've already lost.

Comics definitely embody the importance of practicing free speech.

Free speech is a bourgeois prejudice.

Free speech is life itself.

Free speech is the cornerstone to every right we have.

If pornographers are among the early adopters of the new technology, then it has definite commercial possibilities.

In the United States, unlike any other advanced democracy, money really talks. Our Supreme Court has said that spending money on politicians is a form of free speech. No other court has said that.

It's obvious that I come down on the side of free speech for anybody's work.

The best answer to bad speech is good speech

None but the dead have free speech.

I like something with 'vice' in it.

The censor's sword pierces deeply into the heart of free expression.

The deadliest bullshit is odorless, and transparent.

Speech doesn't corrupt. Money corrupts, and money isn't speech.

The great thing about the Internet is that it will not abide by the rules.

The remedy for the abuse of free speech is more speech.

The right to free speech is more important than the content of the speech.

When a thing ceases to be a subject of controversy, it ceases to be a subject of interest.

Where there is a great deal of free speech there is always a certain amount of foolish speech.

Skepticism, like chastity, should not be relinquished too readily.

The first amendment protects free speech, but if you don't have freedom of thought, do you really have freedom of speech?

There is a point beyond which even justice becomes unjust.

We travel the world, and our right to free speech is precious.

When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.

Where's there's money involved, there are no good guys.

A succession of philosophers and historians spent their time studiously attempting to say nothing as successfully as possible. The less that was successfully said, the greater the relief and acclaim. No attempt to address any idea, history or fact was able to pass without first being put through the pit-stop of the modern academy. No generality could be attempted and no specific could be uttered.

You have to organize, organize, organize, and build and build, and train and train, so that there is a permanent, vibrant structure of which people can be part.

And what doe they tell us vainly of new opinions, when this very opinion of theirs, that none must be heard but whom they like, is the worst and newest opinion of all others, and is the chief cause why sects and schisms doe so much abound and true knowledge is kept at distance from us ; besides yet a greater danger which is in it.

Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say.

A study of the San Francisco Beat enclave by psychiatrist Dr. Francis Rigney in the late 1950's showed 60 percent "were so psychotic or crippled by tensions, anxiety and neurosis as to be nonfunctional in the competitive world." In contrast, the several studies released so far made of the student radicals at Berkeley show them to be stable, serious, and of above-average intelligence. The point is that the Beats had to "cop out" of the Rat Race because they couldn't perform; the New Left chooses to reject a society it could easily be successful in.

Both groups [of pundits] were critics, and that is the heart of the problem. If you are a pundit, you seem so smart when you are telling the President what he did wrong… This [is] mostly BS.

Blasphemy is just the fanatic's name for criticism. Charb writes wisely: 'A believer can blaspheme only to the extent that the idea of blasphemy holds any meaning to him. A non-believer, no matter how hard he tries, 'cannot' blaspheme. God is sacred only to those who believe in him. If you wish to insult or offend God, you have to be sure that he exists. The strategy used by minority group activists masquerading as anti-racists is to pass off blasphemy as Islamophobia and Islamophobia as racism.' The crucial distinction we must defend is between acts of imagination and acts of violence....Faith is not the enemy. Fanaticism is the enemy. It always is. But only a fool would deny that faith has been the seedbed of fanaticism in mankind's long and sorry struggle for the light. As much as at times we need to seek "solidarity" among unlike groups, we also need to "desolidarize," to "unsolidarize"—to put the people we know before the abstract categories we imagine. Come to think of it, making people, with all their flaws, fully visible while leaving generalized types alone is exactly what the caricaturist has always done for us. It's his special form of bravery.

Can't you shut that dog up?" The boy gave me a pitying look. "Not really," he said. "Vlad's a believer in free speech.

Censorship is an assault on our intelligence…not an insult.

Discourse and critical thinking are essential tools when it comes to securing progress in a democratic society. But in the end, unity and engaged participation are what make it happen.

You must stand for free speech in the streets.

Criminalizing offensive speech is a far greater and essential danger to freedom than terrorism is. Anybody who wants to criminalize speech that they find offensive differs from the terrorists only in degree, not in kind.

De som har makt over ordene bør være edru blant de rasende.

Efforts to silence the people who raised their voice – whether through violence, intimidation or the courts – meant that three decades after the Rushdie affair there was almost no one in Europe who would dare write a novel, compose a piece of music or even draw an image that might risk Muslim anger. Indeed, they ran in the other direction. Politicians and almost everybody else went out of their way to show how much they admired Islam.

Et quand l'actu tue au royaume des aveugles, il y a des borgnes à ne pas dépasser. - Charlie Hebdo

Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.

Feminism, which is supposedly for everybody, apparently has no place for conservative women. Why would feminists need to exclude entire swaths of the population? Because they know their ideology cannot stand up to challenges, they know they themselves do not understand it, and they know that to accomplish their goals they cannot allow discussion to occur....To pretend that your ideology is impenetrable and the obvious answer to modern social problems and then to turn around and exclude people from the discussion only creates more holes in the theories themselves and serves to demonstrate the liberal superiority complex.

Faced with a brass band that was positioned to drown out free speech, Russian activists reacted to the potential confrontation with lemons. With activists eating lemons or pretending to, involuntary saliva reaction of the band made it impossible for them to interrupt.

Feminists often pretend to be angry and offended in order to win debates or, I should say, prevent debates from ever happening. If you can act angry and offended, especially on a college campus, you can shut down the other side using a speech code.

Freedom of speech as I define it is more than a right granted by government. It's a process that each of us must believe in and fight for. You cannot have free speech in a world where everyone wants to deplatform you, destroy you, discard you, or distort you for what you say. Freedom of speech only works to the extent that people embrace it. The "right" alone is meaningless.