Why did you capitalise BELIEVE in the title? How can you believe in freedom of speech? It's not a religion based on non-provable statements.
Freedom of speech has 2 components
1. Freedom from government punishing for speech
2. Freedom of expression in the private world
What I have noticed from the left in America is that they use terms like racism and hate speech so they can form mobs of lemmings to go and intimidate people into not speaking that they disagree with. I believe this is also a form of speech, but it is essentially a rallying cry of being an authoritarian.
If you don't like Milo, then don't go to his event. Don't form a mob to enforce your beliefs. That's my thought at least
Fundamentally, no speech is "free".
I believe in de-regulated speech, though.
There are no worse scum in this world than fascists, rebels and political hypocrites.
Donald Trump is only like Hitler because of the fact he's losing this war on all fronts.
Apparently condemning a fascist ideology is the same as being fascist. And who the fuck are you to say I can't be fascist against fascist ideologies?
If merit was the only dividing factor in the human race, then everyone on Earth would be pretty damn equal.
RIP Genn Greymane, Permabanned on 8.22.18
Your name will carry on through generations, and will never be forgotten.
It is the only thing it should be protected from, since governments are the only ones who have a monopoly on legitimate coercion.
Having said that, I think this thread is somewhat stupid since I highly doubt that anyone here will say that they don't believe in free speech however I think the 2 things are to be kept in mind:
1. Harassment, inciting violence etc etc should still be illegal
2. Calling other people out on the stupid things they say and businesses acting upon them disagreeing with certain things should be okay.
I think it doesn't actually exist in its purest absolute form, and probably can't.
I mean, when you say "the left" do you mean private citizens that are not apart of the government and therefor do not have to comply to freedom of speech rights, or do you mean politicians and other forms of leftist government that most certainly must comply with freedom of speech rights?
When you say things as meaninglessly vague as "the left", you lose all context in your argument because those laws are applied differently between private citizens and public servants, both of whom can be considered "the left".
Edit: And people that don't like Milo won't go to his event. But they are also going to protest his free speech, as is their free speech rights. Stop acting like the right didn't just spend 8 years protesting a black "librlul" president and his awfully republican health care plan or crucifying a secretary of state for using the same type of email server our sitting vice president uses.
Last edited by Manabomb; 2017-06-21 at 07:34 PM.
There are no worse scum in this world than fascists, rebels and political hypocrites.
Donald Trump is only like Hitler because of the fact he's losing this war on all fronts.
Apparently condemning a fascist ideology is the same as being fascist. And who the fuck are you to say I can't be fascist against fascist ideologies?
If merit was the only dividing factor in the human race, then everyone on Earth would be pretty damn equal.
I do. Feelings dont matter to me.
RIP Genn Greymane, Permabanned on 8.22.18
Your name will carry on through generations, and will never be forgotten.
Yes you can say the most ignorant vile shit as long as you are not advocating violence,
I believe in both the Constitutional sense of "Freedom of Speech" and the personal aspect of it - that being the right to speak the content of your thoughts, emotions, or biases. I believe that almost anything should be able to be said, the exception being speech that directly exhorts people to violence or calls for the deaths of others. I also believe that a person is *responsible* for the content of their words. If you speak you have to own what you've said, and accept the ramifications of it should people disagree or even decide that they no longer with to associate with you because of it.
In that light I see almost anything as worthy of discussion, dialectic, and/or debate.
"We're more of the love, blood, and rhetoric school. Well, we can do you blood and love without the rhetoric, and we can do you blood and rhetoric without the love, and we can do you all three concurrent or consecutive. But we can't give you love and rhetoric without the blood. Blood is compulsory. They're all blood, you see." ― Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead