Free Speech Debate

Thirteen languages. Ten principles. One conversation.

Log in | Register | Mailing list

Loading...
1We – all human beings – must be free and able to express ourselves, and to receive and impart information and ideas, regardless of frontiers.»
2We defend the internet and all other forms of communication against illegitimate encroachments by both public and private powers.»
3We require and create open, diverse media so we can make well-informed decisions and participate fully in political life.»
4We speak openly and with civility about all kinds of human difference.»
5We allow no taboos in the discussion and dissemination of knowledge.»
6We neither make threats of violence nor accept violent intimidation.»
7We respect the believer but not necessarily the content of the belief.»
8We are all entitled to a private life but should accept such scrutiny as is in the public interest.»
9We should be able to counter slurs on our reputations without stifling legitimate debate.»
10We must be free to challenge all limits to free expression justified on such grounds as national security, public order and morality.»

What’s missing?

Is there a vital area we have not addressed? A principle 11? An illuminating case study? Read other people's suggestions and add your own here.
Home | Discussions | Reader’s comment

Reader’s comment

We regularly highlight comments that have made an impression on us. Today's is from pamela who commented on the case study Can Christians wear the cross at work?

3469305764_3e732b4ca8_b
(Photo by LucasTheExperience under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence)

Commenting on the case study Can Christians wear the cross at work?, pamela wrote:

“While we have the right to express our religion and belief, it should be in appropriate ways. If jewelry is banned for safety reasons then wearing a cross would be inappropriate. Of course, if a cross is banned for being a religous symbol, that is a different matter and should be resisted. I tend to think that politically correctness, especially in Britain, has gone too far and is seriously robbing decision makers their ability to think reasonably or spend on matters that promote peace, love and unity!”

To read the discussion piece and respond to pamela, click here.

Print
Published on: April 20, 2012 | 1 Comment

Comments (1)

Automated machine translations are provided by Google Translate. They should give you a rough idea of what the contributor has said, but cannot be relied on to give an accurate, nuanced translation. Please read them with this in mind.

  1. nige says:
    February 20, 2012 at 10:44 am

    where to comment ?

    “We are all neighbours now. Through the internet and mobile phones, we can reach four billion other people. This offers unprecedented chances for free expression.”

    - we always were neighbours. we realise it and can realise it now

    - we should be able to reach 7 billion. whats the hold up?

    - chances yes, reality ?

    Report comment

Leave a comment in any language

Free Speech Debate is a research project of the Dahrendorf Programme for the Study of Freedom at St Antony's College in the University of Oxford. www.freespeechdebate.ox.ac.uk