JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
Do you support same-sex marriages?
( 58 )
-
Do you enjoy watching movies in 3D?
( 24 )
-
Do you support torture as an interrogation method if the objective is to prevent a terrorist attack or capture criminals?
( 73 )
-
Would you like to see all U.S. military forces removed from Okinawa?
( 95 )
-
Should Japan be pledging funds to the IMF, Mekong and for other causes overseas?
( 11 )
-
1
Hosono visits Fukushima No. 4 reactor amid concern over fuel pool
-
2
Lady Gaga's Indonesia concert canceled after threats
-
3
Oceanographer says beachcombers on West Coast may find bones in tsunami debris
-
4
New Jersey town's monument to Korean sex slaves upsetting Japanese officials
-
5
241 civil servants file suit over salary cuts
-
- Business Teaching Positions - Part-time - Kanto Region
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥3,000 ~ ¥5,000 / Hour
-
- National Relief/Substitute Teacher - summer start
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥275,000 ~ ¥300,000 / Month
-
- 営業パーソン
- 加治金属工業株式会社, Tochigi
- Salary: ¥240,000 ~ ¥350,000 / Month Negotiable
Order by Time Order by Popularity
57 Comments
Login to comment
0
oldsmokey
Some people are offended by anything that runs counter to their beliefs. Some people are offended by other people having basic human rights. For example, many Japanese, including the courts, say discrimination is okay because "it is only natural." So the fact that foreigners may have some of the same rights as they do offends some Japanese. The fact that the vast majority of people responding to this poll feel that one should not have the right to say anything that offends others is another good example.
0
HonestDictator
As much as people don't like it, everyone has their own opinion about things. This question is of course badly phrased. The freedom of expression is not about the "right" to offend others. Because what one person may find offensive may not be offensive to others. The "offense" is determined by what a person finds offensive to them.
The only limit to the offense and freedom of expression is when it gets physical or destructive to physical property. Mental and emotional offense can not be counted because everyone has their own opinions about what is/and is not offensive.
0
HonestDictator
Forgot to type, people have the right to feel offended and state that they feel so, but not the right to tell a person what they can or can not say to express their opinions or views.
0
Beelzebub
There is a difference between being obnoxious and inciting a lynching. There is a difference between being offensive and spreading slander. Unfortunately these distinctions are breaking down rapidly on the Internet, as a visit to any political blog will show. I thought Westerners were bad until I began reading posts in Japanese on 2-channel. The man who opened that site belongs in gaol.
0
Alan
Laws that limit free speech, including the so-called "hate crime" laws, are dangerous and misguided. Apart from civil redress for libel and slander against individuals, there should be no restrictions on freedom expression.
0
hellhound
Should freedom of expression include the right to offend others???? Yeah! This is like boxing man, you gotta be able to punch and to take a few punches too. You gotta be able to receive negative and positive criticism. Here in Japan Today I want my opinion to be as offensive as possible, every word should feel/hurt like a stab. That is freedom of expression, you can say whatever the **** you want. Yeah, I want the australians to quit crying because I eat whale for breakfast, I hate every tarento unless she is hot, I hate every famous gaijin because I am jelous... so I will vomit my acid opinion. I love JT.
0
Xinef
The question is asked as if one had to pick one of two extremes.
Take a look at the laws in most countries, you will find that though freedom of speech is kept in the top list of human rights, insults or defamation are part of the "offending" things you are not allowed to use... which I personally think makes sense.
0
doombird
Every opinion you have, every belief and trait and mannerism that makes you who you are, is considered deeply offensive by someone somewhere. The question is, if we formed a consensus that it was not acceptable to say things that offended others, who would ultimately decide what is offensive? What would be left to say? The people who are most easily offended and who complain the loudest are always the ones to set the rules, and have everyone tiptoeing around them.
0
smartacus
Freedom of speech has consequences. A speaker who offends or incites others to violence, for example, must be prepared to accept those consequences, whether they be libel or slander suits, being fired or ostracized, or even worse, being beaten up or killed.
0
WilliB
If you must never offend anyone, there is no freedom of speech. Someone will always be offended by different opinion.
And if you disagree, I am offended. So there.
0
ashika1009
The poll question is leading and can produce no real meaningful results. It is a flawed question, but it was indeed freely expressed and I found myself rather offended. Hmmmm . . . .
0
presto345
Offending others is a sign of disrespect. It is also a sign of lack of education, and understanding of those who are from different backgrounds, religions or orientation. It is also a sign of impotence, of not knowing how to deal with things unfamiliar. In this modern world freedom and freedom of speech is misinterpreted as one can do what one likes. It's not only misguided, but plain wrong.
0
Farmboy
As WilliB notes, if you don't offend anyone, then not much of interest is being said. The question is worded rather strangely. There is no "right to offend," but if I say something like, "Aliens deserve equal rights," then people who think aliens have equal rights will be offended, and if I say "Aliens don't deserve equal rights," then aliens will be offended.
Imagine this message board with no offensive content. It would be...short.
0
Blue_Tiger
Its going to happen whether or not its "included"....not everyone agrees 100% of the time with even people they most agree wth....
0
ousama
People should be allowed to say what they want, but I think it would be optimal if they kept in mind social ethics/morals/manners when speaking. However, people are rarely, if ever, so nice all the time so at the very least I think people should recognize proper times/places to blatantly insult people. Said insulted people should also learn to be able to deal with the insults or recognize proper times/places to react (the level of violence depends on what is said) to such baiting. People do offend purposely just to get a fight and people become offended just to get a fight. Things like education and understanding would help, but I just can't believe at all that we can never NOT offend someone.
"Right to offend" is basically the same as "right to be a douchebag" and no matter whether it is rightful or not, people will do it anyways.
0
Dewaashita
Manners are important.
0
mechadamuramu
Yes it should because this poll is almost a trick question. Your freedom of speech should extend all the way up to HURTING other people, not OFFENDING them. This ensures that you can't yell 'fire' in the theater because the panic will almost undoubtably hurt someone. Also it lets you say things that may be offensive to other people's trumped up nobility, religion, etc. that they are overly protected of and will actively try to squash other people's right to free speach because they will find EVERYTHING said about the subject "offensive".
People need to quit being such babies and realize that if they can't openly discuss something they don't have the right to get offended. Even when they do get offended, that's no one's fault but their own.
0
dolphingirl
doombird said it best. Freedom of expression should include everything otherwise it's not really free, is it? Besides, only by being offended are we able to build our best defense.
0
sabiwabi
Freedom of expression includes the right to say things that some people might not want to hear. However, I would say there is something wrong with saying things which are only meant to hurt others. For example, when discussion the holocaust, its one thing to say "I don't believe in this part based on ..." and a completely different (and wrong) thing to say "six million more".
0
Stranger_in_a_Strange_Land
People can be offended by almost anything. In the thread about Ozawa criticizing christianity, my comment "In my opinion, religious people are delusional." was deleted twice for being offensive. Lol. Personally, I find religious views offensive to my common sense and logical reasoning, but I wouldn't suggest they be censored.
0
J_rock
This is a bit of a silly question innit? Someone taking offence can't be avoided when expressing opinions; but defamation, slander and abuse are entirely separate issues.
0
lostrune2
The famous quote:
"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it!"
0
Altria
It's quite funny that JT is asking a question about freedom of expression!
0
m5c32
You do know that when people generally talk about the idea of "freedom of expression" they are referring to it as relates to government. Private entities are not bound by the same laws. At JT, for example, you are bound by the TOS you checked when you signed up.
0
Stoker
I can't understand the mind of anyone who would vote 'No'.
0
Mark_McCracken
Of course.
Dumb question.
0
Good_Jorb
Yes freedom of expression include the right to offend others. That being said if someone wants to express an offensive idea that is fine but when someone wants to force their offensive ideas on me, then no it is not right that should be included in freedom of expression, as it imposes on other freedoms I have. For instance a recent incident my wife and I had with a skinhead.
I was told you're a race traitor because your dating an Asian (offensive yes, but within his freedom of expression). When he added that I most get rid of my wife and join the white nation, then he doesn't have the right to freedom of expression, because his demands conflict with my own personal freedoms.
0
tclh
Yes for freedom of expression but always wisdom is the best because court's cost is not cheap...as offended people also have the rights to sue you.
0
Triple888
If you have nothing to be shameful about you cannot be offended.
0
Maria
There's a time and a place for frank discussion that may offend. People can offend all they want, so long as they can deal with being slapped down.
0
Damien15
Anyone can say "I'm offended by it". Easy way to end a conversation. Hollocaust was a good example. JT has cut some of my posts about it, saying that it's offensive to some people. Though all I was saying that "this comes strange to be becuase of ..." So JT believes if it can be offensive to others, I have no right expressing my views. To me, they are facts collected by people who want to know the truth, all truth, nothing but truth.
0
combinibento
Wow, another question aimed at third graders. Last I checked, it already DOES include that right, so long as we're discussing "rights" in the legal sense. Conversely, if the question is intended to be asked in a vacuum with no reference to laws or Western societies of the past 200+ years, then the mere act of expressing oneself is unrelated to rights, and does not contain, any "rights" whatsoever. The act of expression either offends someone or it doesn't.
0
Disillusioned
Yeah, of course it does include being offensive as long as it is the truth and not slander.
0
Ah_so
41% have voted "No", yet hardly anyone has come forward to defend this position. In the context of Japan, I wonder how Japanese would tend to reply, compared to Westerners. My feeling is that in "harmonious" Japan, there would be a greater tendancy to vote "No" to this question, whereas in the "Confrontational" West, "Yes" would be a far more likely answer.
Also, do people feel that there is a distinction between being offensive as a by-product of expressing an opionion, as opposed to being deliberately offensive e.g. "People who believe in God are delusional" vs. "You are a complete and utter ****"?
0
TokyoJake
StrangerinaStrangeLand - You just summed it up perfectly. Nothing more needs to be said.
0
Weasel
Isn't that the purpose of having the freedom in the first place?
0
JoeBigs
Only those that support tyranny would ever vote no.
0
JoeBigs
That is common, cowards hide behind darkness. Cowards shield themselves in flags and claim to be patriots or patriotic but all the while refusing to stand up for other rights to express themselves.
Many claim to be patriots patriotic or revolutionaries, but in fact they just wish to oppress other people's with their beliefs.
We must always shine the light of truth on those that wish to make the rest live and work in the darkness they create.
Ohhh it is good to be a Social Libertarian.....LOL
Mix some Fiscal Conservative values with logical thinking Socialism and what do you get? A Social Libertarian...LOL
0
JoeBigs
Oh you Rabble-Rouser!LOL
0
IvanCoughalot
Of course it should.
0
amerijap
Absolutely NOT. It's just opening up the Pandra's box. Just because the US citizens are guranteed the first amendment does not mean they are entitled to make hate speeches. People should Never(!), ever(!!) be allowed to make speeches that include the motives to attack others.
0
DarkKnghtZ
Absolutely yes. If someone says something that offends me, either a) it would offend most anyone and it will get shut down by the masses, or b) I will have something far more offensive for that person in retort. It might shut up some of the crybabies of the world. WAAAAAH christmas offends me, WAAAAAH the pledge of allegience offends me. I could just as easily say that anything but a short skirt on a woman offends me because im a pervert, but I doubt it would go very far. I see no reason other extremely opinionated and easily shrugged off instances should be any different.
0
combinibento
amerijap, the question is whether freedom of expression should include the right to "offend others" - not whether it should include the right to incite riots, violence, etc. And FYI, contrary to what you may think, the First Amendment does not include the latter.
0
LostinNagoya
No, it shouldn't. An offense is the first step leading to mistakes, sometimes irrevocable.
0
amerijap
Well, people can "offend others" in various means including publicity stunt, hate speech, harassment, etc. And, believe it or not, the First Amendment seems to be facing the crisis in the US democracy since 9/11, as such shock-jockers as Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Michael Savage are high-jacking the millions of Americans nationwide by spitting out a nasty language days in and days out.
0
IcingDeath
OH sure. I believe people should have the right to say whatever they wanna say and that the government should enact no laws that hinder that right. However, do be prepared to deal with the consequences of some of the things that fly out of your mouth. Much more so if you have loose lips and a low will power. I tell you now, I will never try to take that right from someone, but I will punch someone square in the nose if they are just being down right disrespectful.
0
HonestDictator
IcingDeath once you react in a physical manner that inflicts bodily harm to another person's body you are beyond the right to freedom of expression. You'll have violated the law and will be charged with assault. You can curse, swear, argue with them all you want, but you can not harrass, assault, or damage property that does not belong to you.
Your rights end at the end of your nose.
0
Monkeyz
I guess it depends on your definition of "offend." If your definition of "offend" is like, "Oh no! You said 'ass!' I am so offended!" then of course you should be allowed to say it. (I wonder if public swearing is still against the law in some towns in the US. I know it was a handful of years ago.)
The problem is, hate speech can also be termed "offensive." And people should not be allowed to use hate speech. Words inciting people to violence are "offensive." They too should not be used. Basically, your rights end where they trample on mine, and if I'm made to feel unsafe because of your actions, that's where we begin to have a problem.
0
USARonin
So... 'hate speech' in the public square is offensive but sayin' whatever one wills outta their pie-holes is acceptable?
If the daddy of a five-year-old objects to your constant use of the word #%&* in the park next to children, which of you has the moral high ground?
Back to top