Pokebball Posted May 29 Posted May 29 3 hours ago, LDD said: Correct and the standard for free speech is that you're not charged with a crime and thrown in jail because your speech is being held against you. Freedom of speech does not mean "freedom from consequences". It is well within the sovereign rights of a country or a business owner to act upon what is being said. the right to free speech is only between an individual and the government. This right has been violated in this and other similar cases. Businesses and other individuals don't apply here. They can apply whatever "consequences" they choose.
nedboy7 Posted May 30 Posted May 30 7 hours ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said: And here you are posting to reinforce how angry and dumb you are. Good for u! One doesn't have to be angry to point out idiots like you and big deuche.
AlBUNDY4TDS Posted May 30 Posted May 30 8 hours ago, nedboy7 said: One doesn't have to be angry to point out idiots like you and big deuche. Oh, but you're angry as ***** so.......
JFKjr Posted May 30 Posted May 30 10 hours ago, nedboy7 said: One doesn't have to be angry to point out idiots like you and big deuche. So much hellfire, so little time.
nedboy7 Posted May 30 Posted May 30 4 hours ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said: Oh, but you're angry as ***** so....... We know that navigating reality is hard for you guys.
AlBUNDY4TDS Posted May 30 Posted May 30 (edited) 1 hour ago, nedboy7 said: We know that navigating reality is hard for you guys. As someone who voted or would've voted for Biden, you are disqualified from using the word reality. Edited May 30 by AlBUNDY4TDS 1 1
Roundybout Posted Thursday at 03:05 PM Posted Thursday at 03:05 PM 6 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: You want an American politician stripped of citizenship and deported for his beliefs. You have absolutely no room to argue.
The Frankish Reich Posted Thursday at 03:06 PM Posted Thursday at 03:06 PM 5 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: I agree with you here. A lot of speech is offensive, at least to some people, and for good reason. But a free society has to tolerate that because the risks and consequences of limiting speech may be worse. But here's what I don't get: some of the people who support your viewpoint are the same people who say that Harvard should not tolerate exactly the same kind of speech made on its own campus. So how valuable exactly is this notion of free speech? 1
Big Blitz Posted Thursday at 03:13 PM Author Posted Thursday at 03:13 PM 1 minute ago, The Frankish Reich said: I agree with you here. A lot of speech is offensive, at least to some people, and for good reason. But a free society has to tolerate that because the risks and consequences of limiting speech may be worse. Excellent. 1 minute ago, The Frankish Reich said: But here's what I don't get: some of the people who support your viewpoint are the same people who say that Harvard should not tolerate exactly the same kind of speech made on its own campus. So how valuable exactly is this notion of free speech? The difference is this argument over “misinformation” vs hate speech. Harvard is a private institution you are paying to go to. You should be protected from abuse. The federal government funds it - it can choose not to fund it. It didn’t say Harvard needs to close. The government has the right to protect its citizens from abuse. Misinformation is not the same thing. The government has zero business deciding what should or should not be “misinformation.”
The Frankish Reich Posted Thursday at 03:23 PM Posted Thursday at 03:23 PM 8 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: The government has zero business deciding what should or should not be “misinformation.” But it is in the business of deciding what is "harassment" that should be banned or punished as an exception to that free speech principle.
AverageAllensSuspensor Posted Thursday at 03:38 PM Posted Thursday at 03:38 PM 39 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: The EU sure can come up with alot of *****. Unfortunately. 1
Recommended Posts