David nails it. Confidence in the moral truth of our beliefs & convictions should make us more, not less, secure in promoting free speech, free exercise, free conscience. We go forward with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right.https://twitter.com/DavidAFrench/status/1175152341944885248 …
-
-
Replying to @baseballcrank
I still think people haven’t come down to the nub of this debate yet.
2 replies 0 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @michaelbd
I think David has decisively won the argument on legal rights, legal strategy & the Constitution. The counter-argument is what to do 1) in politics/policy areas not constrained by Con Law or 2) in the culture broadly. But that risks agreement in lieu of argument.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @baseballcrank
I see. But even philosophically there are obviously types of disagreements or issues where reciprocity between equal persons (good) bleeds into reciprocity between good and evil.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @michaelbd
I agree that if there is going to be a real debate on that point, it needs concrete examples. The Hadley Arkes point on SSM tiptoed up to that but didn't offer a case.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @baseballcrank
So for instance, Charlie and I agree that Catholics should be free to found Catholic schools. We disagree about whether Flying Spaghetti Monster people would be doing something equivalent if they did.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @michaelbd @baseballcrank
But to say they should have the freedom to do it is not to say it is equivalent.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HurstBlake @baseballcrank
At some point you have to be able to pronounce Pop Rocks are candy and treated like candy in the law, and Fentanyl is a drug. Similarly, putting up Flying Spaghetti Monster statues to mock the Christmas crèche in town...
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @michaelbd @HurstBlake
I think you can take an expansive view of free exercise rights without having to buy into insane plastic-reindeer readings of the Establishment Clause.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @baseballcrank @HurstBlake
Similarly, I think you can have an expansive view of free speech that doesn’t make publicly hosted Drag Queen Story Hour legally indistinguishable from Charles Dickens book club.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
It should not be socially indistinguishable. But legally? The problem is how to draw an intelligible standard that is not an invitation for abuse.
-
-
Replying to @baseballcrank @HurstBlake
Trying not to draw standards is similarly open to abuse
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @michaelbd @HurstBlake
Viewpoint-neutrality is, as legal standards go, a standard and a relatively concrete one.
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
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.