So you want to repeal the right to free speech? How would that have worked for women's rights, civil rights, gay rights?
-
-
Replying to @primalpoly
.
@primalpoly Some nuance, please! You know as well as I that cooperation requires policing. Why should speech be different?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @David_S_Wilson
Informal mutual policing through social nudges is very different from the government censorship prohibited by
#1A1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @primalpoly @David_S_Wilson
Sure - informal or formal, but why call out government? My problem with libertarians - too quick to reject gov.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RobertMKadar @David_S_Wilson
I guess some folks just don't mind being told what they're allowed to say and think, and some folks do mind.
1 reply 2 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @primalpoly
.
@primalpoly@RobertMKadar We're talking about the need to referee cooperation applying to speech, not mind control...2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @David_S_Wilson @RobertMKadar
But mind control always operates under the euphemism of 'cooperation'. That's why I don't want to repeal
#1A2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
"Free speech" is already related. E.g., it's illegal to disturb the peace.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @froodude
.
@AriFreuman@primalpoly@RobertMKadar You're right. Speech is already regulated. The question is whether it can become better regulated...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @David_S_Wilson
.
@AriFreuman@primalpoly@RobertMKadar ..both informally and legally, using "this view of life" as a navigational guide.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
There are 6 types of 'unprotected' speech. Everything else (at least) should be legal. http://www.wneclaw.com/medialaw/unprotectedcategories.html …
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.