Zone1 Do you believe in Free Speech

[Slade3200]

Why stick to only facts on a message board for opinions?

Because in your case your opinions are translating what other people think and feel and you’re very bad at it. Makes you sound like a moron. If that’s what you’re going for then cool. Otherwise stick to the facts

 

[martybegan]

Because in your case your opinions are translating what other people think and feel and you’re very bad at it. Makes you sound like a moron. If that’s what you’re going for then cool. Otherwise stick to the facts

And yet here you are continuing to deny what I see as obvious.

You are one of those posters who just gripes, never gives their actual position, and just snipes at anyone else's.

 

[Slade3200]

And yet here you are continuing to deny what I see as obvious.

You are one of those posters who just gripes, never gives their actual position, and just snipes at anyone else's.

It’s always amusing when the blind insist on leading the way. I’ll just sit back and watch you run in to walls. I suppose you meant to run into those walls though right?

 

[martybegan]

It’s always amusing when the blind insist on leading the way. I’ll just sit back and watch you run in to walls. I suppose you meant to run into those walls though right?

Thanks for making my point.

 

[Marener]

Do you support free speech, meaning the government has no right to infringe on it, to censor you, or punish you for exercising your free speech rights?

There are boundaries to every right, including free speech. Some speech is not protected and the government can punish you for saying it, such as incitement to violence, lying under oath. I don't think we should get rid of those boundaries.

For example: If someone says an election is stolen, would you defend the right of that person to say it? Or do you believe that person should be silenced, either by the government or a corporation?

The government can silence people. Corporations can't. There's a world of difference between the two.

Now look at how Dems react to President Trump saying an election was rigged. Suddenly this is called “misinformation”, and of course “a threat to democracy”. They fully support censorship of Donald Trump and even just random people on the internet.

Trump is a threat to the country. Faith in our institutions is necessary for the country to survive. Underminng it makes it worse. That said, no one is taking away his right to say it. Contrary to the idiotic statements on right wing media, he has not been indicted for just saying these things but on a broad campaign to reverse the outcome of the election by corrupt means.

 

[Lastamender]

The Magats can't tell right from wrong, no wonder they follow a pied Piper.

And you follow criminals. Remember the pied piper helped people by getting rid of rats.. The people you support hate Americans.

 

[Lastamender]

There are boundaries to every right, including free speech. Some speech is not protected and the government can punish you for saying it, such as incitement to violence, lying under oath. I don't think we should get rid of those boundaries.

The government can silence people. Corporations can't. There's a world of difference between the two.

Trump is a threat to the country. Faith in our institutions is necessary for the country to survive. Underminng it makes it worse. That said, no one is taking away his right to say it. Contrary to the idiotic statements on right wing media, he has not been indicted for just saying these things but on a broad campaign to reverse the outcome of the election by corrupt means.

What? The government can silence no one according to our 1st amendment.

 

[Marener]

What? The government can silence no one according to our 1st amendment.

The first amendment never has and never will protect all speech.

Obviously.

 

[Lastamender]

The first amendment never has and never will protect all speech.

Obviously.

Not with criminals in charge.

 

[Slade3200]

Thanks for making my point.

That was my point and certainly not something you’ve been making. Unless now your shifting to say you’ve been agreeing with me

 

[theHawk]

And there was no need to ask it, given the answers are already known. Liberals are always on the side of liberty and free speech.


Nope. Unlike conservatives (see: DeSantis), we oppose all government censorship.


They have the right to censor.

For example, look at this board. You're not allowed to do certain things. That's fine.


Lying like that is a form of trolling, and private orgs need to keep trolling under control. Letting everyone say anything just means the most badly behaved can destroy all disucssion

That is, you support censorship-by-trolling. That makes you the bad guy. The right in general uses censorship-by-trolling as a mainstay tactic, making them the enemies of free speech.


You're acting like the Soviet Union did, when you try to force all media to repeat party propaganda unchallenged.


No, she didn't.

But you're allowed to speak a lie like that, because you're not doing it in a trolling manner.

Nothing you said makes any sense. You literally just state the opposite of reality.

 

[theHawk]

Trump is a threat to the country. Faith in our institutions is necessary for the country to survive. Underminng it makes it worse. That said, no one is taking away his right to say it. Contrary to the idiotic statements on right wing media, he has not been indicted for just saying these things but on a broad campaign to reverse the outcome of the election by corrupt means

Standing for free and honest elections is not a threat to anything or anyone, except to the people committing voter fraud and stealing elections.

 

[Kruska]

Who gets to judge what is true information and what is false information... or what is Russian Disinformation. Hunter Biden Laptop anyone?

The respective court - aka a Judge in Germany - or a Judge and a Jury in the USA.

Hunter's alleged laptop affair, has AFAIK nothing to do with free speech - but with a possible criminal investigation. The same would go for a voting fraud, allegedly committed by e.g. Trump in regards to Georgia.

Trumps claim that the election was stolen - would break his neck in e.g. Germany. Since it is a very simple issue in Germany to check upon an election (it's counting procedures, ballots and it's results).

 

[JoeMoma]

The respective court - aka a Judge in Germany - or a Judge and a Jury in the USA.

Hunter's alleged laptop affair, has AFAIK nothing to do with free speech - but with a possible criminal investigation. The same would go for a voting fraud, allegedly committed by e.g. Trump in regards to Georgia.

Trumps claim that the election was stolen - would break his neck in e.g. Germany. Since it is a very simple issue in Germany to check upon an election (it's counting procedures, ballots and it's results).

So those in power dictate "The Truth"

 

[Kruska]

So those in power dictate "The Truth"

Off course they try, and mostly succeed - the USA needs to shape up it's judicial/legal system.

Independent of that - the USA has laws in place - and they need and can be applied accordingly, independent of the accused being a social lowlife, a President or a former President.

The USA always has been a Capitalistic society - so $$$ naturally rule and they also decide the outcome of an election in the USA - now because e.g. Trump needs to face the law, MAGA/s want's to implement or promote socialist ideals??? Off course they won't say socialist - but CHRISTIAN ideals - denying and obscuring the fact that Christianity is nothing else but socialism.

 

[Marener]

Standing for free and honest elections is not a threat to anything or anyone, except to the people committing voter fraud and stealing elections.

If he were honest about it, it wouldn’t be a problem. The threat is when Trump lied constantly and repeatedly about election fraud which didn’t exist.

 

[sartre play]

Free lying with out any demand for truth, is a case for allowing the acceptance of dishonest government.

 

[martybegan]

That was my point and certainly not something you’ve been making. Unless now your shifting to say you’ve been agreeing with me

Nope. Try again there, hammer.

 

[Curried Goats]

Standing for free and honest elections is not a threat to anything or anyone, except to the people committing voter fraud and stealing elections.

It is when your definition of free and fair elections are only the elections who's outcomes you like.

 

[surada]

Saying " a man cannot be a woman" is inciting violence or encouraging crime?

So if Twitter was around during the Civil Rights Movement it should have been allowed to ban calls for counter sit ins or freedom marches?

Are you talking about biology or psychology?