Zone1 Do you believe in Free Speech

[martybegan]

It's fair to say that the left initiated the latest campaign of using government to dictate culture, ie "social engineering". But now the right has caved to the "if you can't 'em join 'em" mentality and intends to use the government to dictate culture in a different direction.

Where do you see the right crashing leftist speeches and events on a routine basis?

 

[martybegan]

It's different when you do it. For reasons. Whatever.

???

That's an actual reason, despite your attempt to think it isn't.

Figure it out.

 

[dblack]

Where do you see the right crashing leftist speeches and events on a routine basis?

What? It happens pretty routinely, but why is it relevant to the discussion?

 

[dblack]

That's an actual reason, despite your attempt to think it isn't.

Figure it out.

I think, ultimately, the reason has to do with the religious right and their zeal for shaming sexual promiscuity. But I don't really want to argue abortion. It's almost always about religion, or at least involves religious convictions.

 

[BackAgain]

Here’s the difference that you MAGA seem not to understand about free speech.

You’re perfectly free to say “I want my wife dead.”

You are not perfectly free to say “I want my wife dead” as you slip $10,000 in an envelope across the table to a hit man.

Both are speech. The second is a conspiracy to commit murder. The first is not.

Almost all crimes involve speech.

Your Orange Jesus is not being charged for “free speech.”

Surprisingly, the first part of your “free speech” analysis is correct (despite your false claim that supporters of MAGA don’t get it).

But your little screed then falls apart.
For, there is no analog between hiring the hitman (in your example) and anything done by Trump.

 

[martybegan]

What? It happens pretty routinely, but why is it relevant to the discussion?

Because it's only going to get worse as long as one side has the advantage throughout all forms of discussion, expression, and communications.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

It's pertinent to the thread as it's just another example of "principles" that you called out on me.

I said there is no point having principles if you're constantly compromising them. That's it.

I don't care what your personal principles are.

 

[martybegan]

I think, ultimately, the reason has to do with the religious right and their zeal for shaming sexual promiscuity. But I don't really want to argue abortion. It's almost always about religion, or at least involves religious convictions.

There are secular reasons to being against abortion on demand. Just because you lack the ability to understand other's motivations doesn't default their motivations to your biases.

 

[martybegan]

I said there is no point having principles if you're constantly compromising them. That's it.

I don't care what your personal principles are.

Principles are a starting point, and a bedrock. Since we can't impose or wills on others via magic pixie dust, compromise is often required in the real world.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Saying a "woman can never be a man" is violating some level of decorum?

It's not my call.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

It's fair to say that the left initiated the latest campaign of using government to dictate culture, ie "social engineering". But now the right has caved to the "if you can't 'em join 'em" mentality and intends to use the government to dictate culture in a different direction.

Bingo.

 

[martybegan]

It's not my call.

Dodging. In this thread it's your opinion, and you seem to lack the gravitas to expose your opinion.

 

[Rigby5]

I absolutely support the right of anyone to say the election was stolen. I also support the right of people to label it misinformation. It is all free speech.

However, when people go from speech to action, then it is no longer a free speech issue.

There is NO right to free speech on private property.

Actions can easily still be "free speech", such as the Founders were fond of hanging opponents in effigy.

It depends on that the intended results are.
Such as "fighting words" are illegal because they are intended to cause illegal violence.

The bogus impeachments and indictments are not protected because they were based on deliberate lies and cause monetary harm.
Candidates are supposed to have diplomatic immunity because the voters are the ones who are supposed to determine guilt or innocence.

 

[dblack]

Because it's only going to get worse as long as one side has the advantage throughout all forms of discussion, expression, and communications.

What is it you're seeing as "the advantage"? If you're saying there are laws pushing leftist values, I wholeheartedly support repealing them.

If you're just whining about woke corporations, or left-leaning media, or whatever - that's freedom. Get over it.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Principles are a starting point, and a bedrock. Since we can't impose or wills on others via magic pixie dust, compromise is often required in the real world.

Maybe stop trying to impose your will on others. Some people will detest it and refuse. Others believe there are no compromises for our liberties.

 

[martybegan]

What is it you're seeing as "the advantage"? If you're saying there are laws pushing leftist values, I wholeheartedly support repealing them.

If you're just whining about woke corporations, or left-leaning media, or whatever - that's freedom. Get over it.

It's not freedom when it's the same people running both and colluding and picking a side.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Dodging. In this thread it's your opinion, and you seem to lack the gravitas to expose your opinion.

Because my opinion on the matter doesn't change anything.

 

[martybegan]

Maybe stop trying to impose your will on others. Some people will detest it and refuse. Others believe there are no compromises for our liberties.

Bake that cake peasant, give up your ICE vehicle, stop using your air conditioner, no plastic bags, no incandescent lights, our pride overrides your religion, and I can go on.

 

[martybegan]

Because my opinion on the matter doesn't change anything.

Sorry, can't dodge like that with me. It matters in this thread and this debate.

 

[dblack]

It's not freedom when it's the same people running both and colluding and picking a side.

The collusion should be stopped. No question. But I don't think there's been as much of that as Trumpsters like to pretend.

Dems crossed the line with their "suggestions" that social media sites censor speech they considered "misinformation". We should hold them accountable for that and not back off. But most of what Trumpsters are complaining about isn't collusion, or government dictating censorship. It's just that the majority of the media outlets lean left and you want to force them to accommodate opposing views, and that's just as bad as telling them what they have to censor.