fØrti Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 Critic: Although some people claim it is inconsistent to support freedom of speech and also support legislation limiting the amount of violence in TV programs, it is not. We can limit TV program content because the damage done by the violent programs is more harmful than the decrease in freedom of speech that would result from the limitations envisioned by the legislation. Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the critic’s reasoning? A. In evaluating legislation that would impinge on a basic freedom, we should consider the consequences of not passing the legislation. B. One can support freedom of speech while at the same time recognizing that it can sometimes be overridden by other interests. C. When facing a choice between restricting freedom of speech or not, we must decide based on what would make greatest number of people the happiest. D. If the exercise of a basic freedom leads to some harm, then the exercise of that freedom should be restricted. E. In some circumstances, we should tolerate regulations that impinge on a basic freedom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lsr Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 Imo B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegoLife Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 My answer is B. The critic claims that it is consistent that some side-effects may be restricted while allowing the basic rights to continue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackXam Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 Agreed B! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nikiforos Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 go for D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wisper_leaf Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 Answer is D. B and D are pretty close though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phlip Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 I go for B! The argument states that 1.it is not inconsistent to sometimes overcome fos and 2. the damage done by the violent programs is more harmful than the decrease in freedom of speech. This is perfectly stated by B. D leaves "1" out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fØrti Posted September 19, 2007 Author Share Posted September 19, 2007 OA - B Thanks Lego for explanation! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.