Do you believe in a full free speech?
(If your answer contains the word "but", just click no you hypocrite)
If I said Yes I would love being able to speak whatever, but at the same time I would have to suffer the opinions of retards I do not agree with and I would be a hypocrite for wanting to smash someone's head in over a retarded thing they said.
However if I said No, the moment I get filtered for My speech I would quickly become rebellious and oppose it in any way I can in order to be able to be heard again.
There is no easy answer that you can go with, without sacrificing something to make it work as written.
Sorry we're hypocrites.
@Deplorable_Degenerate @Curvin
Porn is hardly speech. In the same way, as a thrown brick is not speech.
@LukeAlmighty @Deplorable_Degenerate @Curvin
Pornography is an body activity, typicly in front of a camera.
Giving the Nazi salute in front of a camera is also an body activity.
Would you say that banning videos showing people giving the Nazi salute, just without any verbal speech, is not a restriction of freedom of speach /expression?
@bjolokalo @Deplorable_Degenerate @Curvin
You are now literally comparing hand movement to rape.
I don't care if you're trolling or serious, since either way, continuing this debate would be worthless even for me.
@fish @Deplorable_Degenerate @Curvin @bjolokalo
An academic distraction, but this time, it's an advanced one, so I am happy to elaborate.
I do not agree with Jordan Peterson often, but on this topic, he formulated it perfectly. Freedom to speak is the freedom to THINK.
You need to hear an idea in order to even start thinking about it, and you do need other people to build on it. This is the reason, why you also need the ability to hear all versions of the idea you care about, not just an approved academic one. Because you never know where in the noise is the breakpoint you need to see a new truth.
So, why is freedom of expresion the subversion? because a thrown brick is an expresion of your idea. So is glueing yourself on the road to stop an ambulance. The left loves their "non violent" but deadly protests, and they will do anything they can to hide this psychopathic tendency under a wordplay. But does that brick thrown at your head allow you to think about the complex implications in the new law? I don't think so.
So, no. I am definitely not going to accept the frame of "freedom of expression".
Ignoring how the left and several faux libertarians have thoroughly violated all three stipulations, not sure how much I believe even that anymore.
@Deplorable_Degenerate @fish @Curvin @bjolokalo
Freedom of expression behind closed doors sounds to me like something Destiny could come up with next week.
You can say everything you want in your safe box, but not here. Here is the quality speech zone.
@Deplorable_Degenerate @fish @Curvin @bjolokalo
Do you seriously not understand, why I made the point that I am talking about free speech, not freedom of expression for this exact reason? Because it's a phrase so open, it allows in the most insane acts, so you can start banning it all together?
It's the same as switching gay rights to LGBT+ rights.
@LukeAlmighty @Deplorable_Degenerate @fish @Curvin
Just as nonverbal communication can be harmless (and may not be), mere speech can be problematic: many army commanders, mafia bosses, and politicians have killed countless people simply by giving verbal orders to their subordinates (by his speech). If you are the leader of a sect full of obedient sheep and you say, "Kill Mr. XYZ," how do you evaluate that using the criterion of freedom of speech?
