SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Sun Tzu who wrote (96317)4/25/2003 8:15:04 PM
From: Ilaine  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
>> it is wrong to "discuss" the idea because it taints his most valuable possession, his name<<

Absolutely flat wrong under US first amendment law.

I have no idea what the law is in any place but the United States, but in the US it is absolutely essential that the general public be allowed to discuss politicial events, political thoughts, and politicians with very little restraint.

The only restraint in the US on free speech pertaining to public figures is that conscious disregard of the truth about public figures is actionable.

False statements about public figures are not actionable in the USA unless the speaker either knows his/her statements are false or makes them with conscious disregard of truth or falsity. This is the rule set forth by the US Supreme Court in the case of New York Times vs. Sullivan.

This is a very tough standard. Public speech about politicians and other public figures is essentially unregulated in the US.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News