Freedom liberated? or Imprisoned? - 8 views

• 
  #1 Chen Guo Lim on 15 Sep 09

   

  http://vodpod.com/watch/974204-gopalan-nair-us-blogger-arrested-in-singapore
  
  This is just one of the cases of bloggers being arrested in Singapore.
  Such an arrests have also taken place as these bloggers have been reported to have written texts and articles that may have the potential to disrupt public peace such as racial harmony.
  
  However isn't the internet supposed to be a place where freedom of speech is being practiced?
  
  If freedom is being defined, than can we still call this kind of freedom freedom?
  
  IF the law defines and put boundaries on our freedom based on an argument of protecting the public peace, is this not an intrusion of rights, thus constitutes as something unethical?

   

  <div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner"><a href="http://vodpod.com/watch/974204-gopalan-nair-us-blogger-arrested-in-singapore" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://vodpod.com/watch/974204-gopalan-nair-us-blogger-arrested-in-singapore</a> <br /> <br /> This is just one of the cases of bloggers being arrested in Singapore. <br /> Such an arrests have also taken place as these bloggers have been reported to have written texts and articles that may have the potential to disrupt public peace such as racial harmony. <br /> <br /> However isn't the internet supposed to be a place where freedom of speech is being practiced? <br /> <br /> If freedom is being defined, than can we still call this kind of freedom freedom? <br /> <br /> IF the law defines and put boundaries on our freedom based on an argument of protecting the public peace, is this not an intrusion of rights, thus constitutes as something unethical?</div>

  ...

  Cancel
• 
  #2 lee weiting on 15 Sep 09

   

  i do agree that the internet is suppose to be a place where there is freedom of speech, however we must also consider the society that we're living in. For us living in Singapore, we must accept the fact that our freedom is limited. though limited, i would still call this kind of freedom freedom. if we can really be that "free" like what you seemed to be suggesting, then what will our world and society become? People may be free to do whatever they want as there will be no boundaries to stop them from doing it. This may in fact disrupt the functioning of society.
  
  So i do not agree that by putting boundaries on our freedom based on the argument of protecting public peace is consider unethical. By limiting our freedom for society good, i will consider this as ethical. i do not think that by limiting our freedom is equivalent to losing our freedom, we still enjoy certain level of freedom that is within the boundaries set and our society can function as well. (utilitarianism point of view)
  
  
  Chen Guo Lim wrote:
  > http://vodpod.com/watch/974204-gopalan-nair-us-blogger-arrested-in-singapore
  >
  > This is just one of the cases of bloggers being arrested in Singapore.
  > Such an arrests have also taken place as these bloggers have been reported to have written texts and articles that may have the potential to disrupt public peace such as racial harmony.
  >
  > However isn't the internet supposed to be a place where freedom of speech is being practiced?
  >
  > If freedom is being defined, than can we still call this kind of freedom freedom?
  >
  > IF the law defines and put boundaries on our freedom based on an argument of protecting the public peace, is this not an intrusion of rights, thus constitutes as something unethical?

   

  <div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner">i do agree that the internet is suppose to be a place where there is freedom of speech, however we must also consider the society that we're living in. For us living in Singapore, we must accept the fact that our freedom is limited. though limited, i would still call this kind of freedom freedom. if we can really be that "free" like what you seemed to be suggesting, then what will our world and society become? People may be free to do whatever they want as there will be no boundaries to stop them from doing it. This may in fact disrupt the functioning of society. <br /> <br /> So i do not agree that by putting boundaries on our freedom based on the argument of protecting public peace is consider unethical. By limiting our freedom for society good, i will consider this as ethical. i do not think that by limiting our freedom is equivalent to losing our freedom, we still enjoy certain level of freedom that is within the boundaries set and our society can function as well. (utilitarianism point of view) <br /> <br /> <br /> Chen Guo Lim wrote: <br /> > <a href="http://vodpod.com/watch/974204-gopalan-nair-us-blogger-arrested-in-singapore" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://vodpod.com/watch/974204-gopalan-nair-us-blogger-arrested-in-singapore</a> <br /> > <br /> > This is just one of the cases of bloggers being arrested in Singapore. <br /> > Such an arrests have also taken place as these bloggers have been reported to have written texts and articles that may have the potential to disrupt public peace such as racial harmony. <br /> > <br /> > However isn't the internet supposed to be a place where freedom of speech is being practiced? <br /> > <br /> > If freedom is being defined, than can we still call this kind of freedom freedom? <br /> > <br /> > IF the law defines and put boundaries on our freedom based on an argument of protecting the public peace, is this not an intrusion of rights, thus constitutes as something unethical?</div>

  ...

  Cancel

To Top