Zone1 Do you believe in Free Speech

[Rigby5]

I absolutely support the right of anyone to say the election was stolen. I also support the right of people 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.

There can be, such as the right of people to go door to door and promote religions or political parties.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

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

We aren't really having a debate. I'm giving you facts, you counter with your feelings of inadequacy/victimhood.

 

[Coyote]

…

There can be, such as the right of people to go door to door and promote religions or political parties.

I don’t think that is a “right”. Anybody can solicite door to door, but equally a homeowner can tell them to leave,or post signs saying no solicitors or no trespassing.

 

[Rigby5]

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.”

The main illegal quid pro quo was Joe Biden illegally getting Shokin fired in order to protect Burisma Holdings.
Trump did nothing but ask for a recount.
He offered no bribe.

 

[martybegan]

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.

That just what we are seeing. And the end result is it's government by proxy violating our rights.

Get rid of their mechanism to do it, by extending the 1st amendment to certain things, and they loose some of their teeth.

 

[martybegan]

We aren't really having a debate. I'm giving you facts, you counter with your feelings of inadequacy/victimhood.

You are refusing to take a position because you either don't really believe in it, or you know it will make you look bad.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

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.

The right is 100 years behind the left when it comes to media, because the left pretty much invented media.

 

[dblack]

That just what we are seeing. And the end result is it's government by proxy violating our rights.

Get rid of their mechanism to do it, by extending the 1st amendment to certain things, and they loose some of their teeth.

What you're talking bout doesn't "extend" the First. It violates it. Forced speech is every bit as much a violation of the First Amendment as censored speech. Arguably, it's worse.

 

[martybegan]

What you're talking bout doesn't "extend" the First. It violates it. Forced speech is every bit as much a violation of the First Amendment as censored speech. Arguably, it's worse.

They aren't being forced to speak, because the law clearly states their content is third party. Only when Twitter "tweets" is it twitter's "speech"

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Marty cannot stand being told the truth: that free speech is restrained in American law.

 

[martybegan]

Marty cannot stand being told the truth: that free speech is restrained in American law.

Under Strict Scrutiny only. My position improves freedom for the many, which evidently the left doesn't want and likes to hide behind a faux corporate shield when called out on it.

Can Women have penises, JESH, yes or no? Lets see your dedication to the truth, or more accurately, reality.

 

[dblack]

They aren't being forced to speak, because the law clearly states their content is third party. Only when Twitter "tweets" is it twitter's "speech"

If you're claiming that the government should have the power to tell them what the can censor and what they can't, it's a violation of the First Amendment. It's also intrusive government that Republicans would have howled about back in the day. But now they're all over it because they're afraid they're losing the culture war. Any excuse will do.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

You are refusing to take a position because you either don't really believe in it, or you know it will make you look bad.

I gave you my position. It ain't broke.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

There is no "Marty restrained under strict scrutiny" mandates or laws.

You are wrong practically and theoretically.

Under Strict Scrutiny only. My position improves freedom for the many, which evidently the left doesn't want and likes to hide behind a faux corporate shield when called out on it.

Can Women have penises, JESH, yes or no? Lets see your dedication to the truth, or more accurately, reality.

 

[martybegan]

If you're claiming that the government should have the power to tell them what the can censor and what they can't, it's a violation of the First Amendment. It's also intrusive government that Republicans would have howled about back in the day. But now they're all over it because they're afraid they're losing the culture war. Any excuse will do.

Lose the culture war, lose the country.

The 1st amendment gives people the power, not the government, the government just gets to referee then.

 

[martybegan]

I gave you my position. It ain't broke.

No, you didn't. Should twitter ban someone who says "women can't be men"?

 

[martybegan]

There is no "Marty restrained under strict scrutiny" mandates or laws.

You are wrong practically and theoretically.

That doesn't make any sense. I am right, you just don't or won't understand.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

I am right, or you don't or won't understand. You don't make any sense, Marty.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

No, you didn't. Should twitter ban someone who says "women can't be men"?

I don't use Twatter, so it's none of my concern. I think it should all be banned. A position I've made clear.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

That doesn't make any sense. I am right, you just don't or won't understand.

You should make that your life's motto. I'm sure you'll go far.