Does anyone on here not think that their views might just be very similar to his if they had had his background?
The answer isn't to ban him from airing his views, it's better to give him the chance to be publically challenged, I'd love to bring Anthony Clare back from the dead for an episode of In the Psychiatrist's Chair.
avdave2 - MemberDoes anyone on here not think that their views might just be very similar to his if they had had his background?
I've already made that point and yes I believe we would.
Some sanctimonious sod was banging on about this on the radio yesterday saying that as 'A Role Model' he shouldn't be saying these things.
Eh? Role model? When did he get elevated to this status? I presume at the same time as premiership footballers?
This is clearly cobblers. If you went round the country and asked who they considered as role models, I doubt you'd get many takers for boxers or footballers, except for other reasons than boxing or football.
I don't think these people asked or expected to be role models. They don't want to be, and nobody outside the media considers them as such. So its a total nonsense. A completely bloody ridiculous misnomer
At the end of the day its a free country and he can say what the bloody hell he likes. You don't have to agree with it. You don't have to like it. But he's not inciting violence against people. Far from it. He's going out of his way to say thats not the case, while sticking with his views.
I think this says a lot more about the people who are using this as a platform to high-handedly and self-righteously denounce him, than it does about him. At least he's being honest. Most of the usual PC suspects are just promoting their own cynical opportunistic agendas, from what I can see.
I did have a thought that maybe he should run for American SPOTY. He'd be a shoe in!
I did have a thought that maybe he should run for American SPOTY. He'd be a shoe in!
I'd of thought Vice President might be a better option, it's just finding someone suitable to run as President with similar views might be tricky.
You don't have to like it.
You don't have to keep giving him airtime either.
Why not? He's as entitled to his opinion as anyone else?
Theres no shortage of people criticising him.
He's been given a platform to answer them. Thats how free speech works.
It really annoys me this attitude of supporting free speech, until someone says something I don't like
He's been given a platform to answer them. Thats how free speech works.
It really isn't. Free speech is not putting someone in jail for saying something. It's not freedom to get airtime.
It really annoys me this attitude of supporting free speech, until someone says something I don't like
So how come he should have freedom of speech to say the stuff in the first place, but people shouldn't be allowed to give their honest opinion of what he says? 😕
I think this says a lot more about the people who are using this as a platform to high-handedly and self-righteously denounce him, than it does about him. At least he's being honest. Most of the usual PC suspects are just promoting their own cynical opportunistic agendas, from what I can see.
It really isn't. Free speech is not putting someone in jail for saying something. It's not freedom to get airtime.
Don't be ridiculous! Thats exactly what it is. Or should be!
He's answering his many critics. Its a debate. Whether you like it or not. You can't just shut down one side of an argument by depriving them of a platform, just because you don't agree with it. Thats anything but free speech!
His views on homosexuality and abortion, while not yours or mine, are representative of a section of society. They're perfectly entitled to hold these views and to voice them. You don't like them? You don't agree with them? So what! It doesn't make them any less valid
Therefore they have as much right to airtime as people who hold the opposite views. You can't start giving people airtime dependent on whether you agree with them or not. That isn't free speech at all.
Thats Fox News 🙄
He's answering his many critics. Its a debate. Whether you like it or not. You can't just shut down one side of an argument by depriving them of a platform, just because you don't agree with it. Thats anything but free speech!
So when someone says 'I don't think Tyson Fury should be on SPOTY' - surely that's them expressing their opinion using freedom of speech, and even though you don't like it, you defend their right to say it?
Otherwise you're just dealing in a somewhat hilarious level of irony/hypocrisy.
Well the BBC have called it...
So when someone says 'I don't think Tyson Fury should be on SPOTY' - surely that's them expressing their opinion using freedom of speech, and even though you don't like it, you defend their right to say it?
And where have I said that anybody shouldn't be allowed to say anything. I'm saying the opposite. They can say what they like. But in this case they're demanding something. They're demanding that a person whose sporting achievements put him up as a candidate for an award, is put out of the running for that award because he holds views that differ from theirs.
His views aren't illegal. His views don't incite violence. His views are shared by other people. Whether you like it or not
He's not being judged on his views. This is an award that supposedly about sporting achievement. His views on abortion are of no relevence.
If you don't like him. Vote for someone else. Start a campaign for other people to as well. We could call it something? How about democracy? Thats got a catchy ring to it!
But in this case they're demanding something.
Or in other words - saying things.
Things that you don't like. Things you seem to think they shouldn't be saying - just like other people think about what Tyson Fury has said.
Honestly your argument has zero logic to it whatsoever.
This is an award that supposedly about sporting achievement.
Well it has the word 'personality' in the title so not just about sporting achievement. I also find it amazing that people get so het up about such a meaningless popularity contest.
I also find it amazing that people get so het up about such a meaningless popularity contest.
Well at least we agree on something then
the Man's a dickhead, But he's not high up on my list of things to get wound up about TBH.
Therefore they have as much right to airtime as people who hold the opposite views.
Okay, I hold opposing views. So I have as much right to airtime as Tyson Fury?
He's had several hours on the TV, loads of newspaper and website articles, and is being invited to a televised awards evening. Do I have a right to the same coverage?
I just love it that the people who support free speech so much are normally the ones that say people cannot air an option when it is different to theirs. Having people air their views publicly is good as it makes you realise what work still needs to be done in society. We also need to understand that vast vast parts of the world do not agree with our views and what we say and do is not always best for the rest of the world. Look at our version of democracy, it doesn't also ways work in all other countries and cultures. We might wish it did, but it doesn't.
I love it when people mix up "free speech" with "broadcasters' obligation to broadcast speech".
People can say whatever they like, broadcasters aren't obliged to broadcast it.
They're perfectly entitled to hold these views and to voice them. You don't like them? You don't agree with them? So what! It doesn't make them any less valid
So a hate filled Nazi* [ not tyson obv just an example] who preached deaths to homosexuals has views just as valid as mine.. I beg to disagree
As for the other I have not noticed [ though not read the entire thread] anyone saying gag him/ stop him ever speaking. Folk have just said an opinion about what he has said which is perfectly valid.
* i am really not saying he is a Nazi it was juts a counter to Binners views that all views from Ghandi to ISIS from Hitler to Nelson Mandela From Thatcher to not Thatcher are all equally valid... they are not though folk are able to express them.
I just love it that the people who support free speech so much are normally the ones that say people cannot air an option when it is different to theirs
We've been through this.
Okay, I hold opposing views. So I have as much right to airtime as Tyson Fury?
Correct. Thats how it works.
You're getting it now, this free speech thing. Good innit?
I just love it that the people who support free speech so much are normally the ones that say people cannot air an option when it is different to theirs.
STraw man 🙄 - why do people keep repeating this falsehood?
You are just making stuff up here. NO one is saying he does not have free speech we are just exercising our right re what he has said.
Free speech may entail folk disagreeing with what you said...I know stunning revelation eh 🙄 However i think anyone who disagrees with me can suck my balls though which, I assume, is the way we express our respect for free speech
So a hate filled Nazi* [ not tyson obv just an example] who preached deaths to homosexuals has views just as valid as mine.. I beg to disagree
Thats called incitement to violence, and is illegal. So no. Not as valid. As it might well involve going to prison
I read that Dyson were having to rethink the name of their new 'most powerful yet' vacuum cleaner.
They felt the Dyson Fury was going to be a tough sell in certain demographics.
Thats called incitement to violence, and is illegal. So no. Not as valid. As it might well involve going to prison
Agreed so we have established not all opinions are equally valid. Cool
I dont disagree with your broad point* and the "traditional working class" fella can air his views just like we can air them about what we think of the god bothering pugilist
* can we please avoid the right to not be offended bit of this debate 😉
Correct. Thats how it works.You're getting it now, this free speech thing. Good innit?
Great, so how do I get the BBC to give me equal airtime to Tyson Fury?
You could tweet them?
They'd probably pay more attention if you'd just won a world title, in front of a global audience of millions, or something. They're funny like that
Ah, so free speech is contingent on how famous I am?
Not really an equal right then, is it?
[i]how do I get the BBC to give me equal airtime to Tyson Fury? [/i]
become world champion in a sport that gets wide media coverage?
Have a number one single?
Write a book?
lead a major political party?
What you're unlikely to get is air time *just* because you hold the opposite opinion to someone else who has other reasons to be in the media.
[edit] you're not asking for free speech, you're asking for equal distribution rights.
Okay, simpler example:
Do I have the right to be racist, sexist or homophobic on STW?
Is it infringing my free speech if I'm censored or banned from STW for that?
If Tyson Fury was a STW member, would he have the right to air his sexist or homophobic views on here?
'free speech is a fundamental human right and a cornerstone of our democracy - I will defend it to the death, however unpalatable the views being expressed might be'
'unless they're saying Tyson Fury shouldn't be on SPOTY, that's just not on'
😕
Ah, so free speech is contingent on how famous I am?Not really an equal right then, is it?
Now you're struggling with 'rights' and 'expectations'
They're different
Now you're struggling with 'rights' and 'expectations'They're different
Yup. Anyone has a right to say anything (as long as it's not illegal). They don't have a right to expect airtime for their views.
They don't have a right to expect airtime for their views.
I doubt he asked for it. He's hardly actively saught out a platform for his views on homosexuality and abortion.
The mainstream media picked up the original remarks (after some digging, I'm sure) from some obscure website interview he did ages ago. Given the choice, I'm sure he'd rather there wasn't all the fuss, and probably regrets saying the things he said.
But once your opinions are 'The News', you have a right to reply
Carry on being indignant about your lack of TV coverage though, if you like
Ben, I've seen you on BBC television expressing your views.
Would I be right to set up a media campaign denouncing you and your business if I disagreed with you?
I was hoping everyone had forgotten about that 😀
😀
I added the question before I'd noticed your reply.
Dammit, I'm going to have to agree with you now.
Yes, okay, you're right. He has his views, he was asked about them, and defended them as he has a right to do.
Thank you.
🙂
Phwoar. Boxing, isn't it? Hmm?
[img] 
[/img]
He comes across as a heavy weight bell end. He has the right to say whatever he wants to who ever he wants. He also has the right to be judged on it. I do think that with the views that he has he is not a suitable role model and representative of any sport and as such should not be held up for adoration by something such as SPOTY.
I do think that with the views that he has he is not a suitable role model and representative of any sport and as such should not be held up for adoration by something such as SPOTY.
Again... nobody actually thinks of these people as role models. The media just suggest that people do so that they can say that these people shouldn't be held up as role models.
Its stupid to even suggest that they ever were in the first place.
SPOTY - as well as being an oxymoron - is just a bit of fluff to fill a Sunday evenings festive telly. Somewhat ironically, his statements, as well as some of his other shennanigans suggest he may actually be in possession of an actual personality (whether you like it or not is up to you), which means he'll stand out like a sore thumb from the usual parade of bland, anodyne dullards they put up every year
binners - MemberAgain... nobody actually thinks of these people as role models. The media just suggest that people do so that they can say that these people shouldn't be held up as role models.
Not so black and white there Binners. They shouldn't be role models but children do emulate these guys. If a young boy idolises a soccer player who's prone to diving or play acting he may well do the same. There'll be plenty of young boxers who are following what Fury is doing.
Obviously in an ideal world there should be responsible adults around to point out that footballers who dive are pathetic cheats and a boxer who spouts ugly homophobic rhetoric is just secretly afraid that dicks are delicious or is just a needy self publicist trying to attract attention to himself in a sport that is receding from the public's interest.
Tough one, freedom of speech.
Some principles have to be upheld, no matter how much offence is taken.
It's tough being both a romantic old anarcho-lefty and a moral absolutist.
🙂
Nobody has the right not to be offended....
you bunch of ****s!!
😀
