We really need to get past this absolutely idiotic and childish idea that a person's "free speech" is infringed if they are made to suffer any consequences for saying something vile and disgusting
Who decides what is 'vile and disgusting', and who decides what is an appropriate 'consequence'? Those are the problems if you abandon a civic culture of strongly valuing free speech (which is distinct from the #1A legal framework of free speech).
-
-
Seriously? No one went to jail. The government didn't "infringe" on Roseanne's speech. She harmed a brand that her name was attached to under contract and was removed to prevent further damage. It's the capitalist thing to do.
-
I was making a general point, not thinking about any particular case. And you ignored my distinction between culture and law.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- 3 more replies
-
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.