I don't follow the logic here. Free speech support means I'm responsible for providing everyone else a platform?
-
-
Provided it does not result in preventing people from speaking to people who want to hear them speak. Doing that is directly contrary to the principle of the free exchange of ideas. That's just 'might makes right' and those willing to shout loudest get to decide who can talk.
-
Tweet unavailable
-
Yes! If this does not prevent the speaker speaking or those who came to listen from hearing. I also think ignoring something you believe to be very wrong is a failure. Best case scenario, attend with questions that show the problem.Also have counter events. Also march, hold signs
-
The best response to ideas we don't like is presenting better ones and this can happen in many forms which do not include shutting down, banning or shouting over. That is a failure to address bad ideas which is worse than ignoring them. Prevents others from challenging them too.
-
I am taking part in two peaceful protests this month. One to address all the commonwealth countries which still outlaw homosexuality and one to address our dismal lack of freedom of speech.
-
Have we been at cross purposes? I thought you were supporting the banning idea and suggesting obstructive protests which stopped speech but now I think I misunderstood you.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.