But the same system also provided for freedom of speech. That was central to the founding of America. Democratic societies would not be best for minorities if they didn't also have liberal values which allowed them the same rights and freedoms as everyone else.https://twitter.com/helenfairgrieve/status/998281072508096512 …
-
-
somewhat apocryphal - but everyone pretty much agrees with 'you cannot shout fire in a theatre' - Where speech is restrained is open to democratic tools because otherwise only the powerful get to decide upon what is restrained. the conflict between principle and practical.
-
That isn't the expression of an idea so isn't covered under the principle of freedom of speech. We might have a fundamental disagreement where you think that protecting certain classes of people is more important than freedom of speech and I think it is not & cld well backfire.
-
I think the disagreement is more esoteric than that - I don't believe that hate-speech laws are good, helpful or necessary either. I just believe that (even truly awful) mistakes are a part of the system that creates freedom and that those mistakes will eventually be corrected.
-
I haven't said anything contrary to that last sentence tho.
-
i'm not even sure that we are really disagreeing that much - i can't actually remember the last time I disagreed with one of your tweets or articles. My take away from this debate is that 'i seem to agree with you'. sorry if i've been argumentative or annoying.
-
Not at all!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
it is the concept of 'justifiable restraint' of speech. The majority has decided that, an extreme example, that child abuse images are not protected by free speech and this was the will of the majority.
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.