Far right contradiction: they want absolute freedom of speech but want the nanny state to control freedom of choice?

[Anonymous]

[Dargil]

How does the Right want a Nanny state? Turning Rowe over the people's elected representatives in the states (per the 10th Amendment) IS free speech. Prove me wrong. This in no way detracts from free choice. Go to any blue state to have someone suck out your baby's brain out of its skill. You just have to drive farther. Awwww.

[Asker]

It absolutely DOES detract from freedom of choice, telling other people what they can and cannot do - authoritarian states interfere and dictate to people. Freedom loving liberal countries do not. It's none of your business what private individuals do particularly when it doesn't affect you. Try shouting your mouth of in Putin's Russia and see if you still have free speech

[Dargil]

Most European countries have more restrictive abortion laws than we do. Overturning Rowe does not detract from freedom of choice; telling other people what they can and cannot do. It only tells them where they can do it. Murder your baby in Cali or New York.

[Asker]

If only life was that simplistic. The reasons for abortion are complex, unfortunately Fox News doesn't expose you to such nuisance. Also 95% of European women of reproductive age live in countries which allow abortion on demand or for broad socioeconomic reasons.

[Dargil]

And I really don't care what they do. Abortion is infanticide, no matter how you rationalize it.

[Asker]

Let me guess, you don't do nuisance? I suspect you're ok with the death penalty and widespread gun ownership causing thousands of deaths but your very very against abortion?

[Asker]

*nuance

[Dargil]

You sound a bit desperate to me. Keep guessing.

[Asker]

So if an under age girl is raped and becomes pregnant? String em' up yeh?

[Dargil]

"So if an under age girl is raped and becomes pregnant? String em' up yeh?"
I never even hinted at that. There are even more asterisks, but they are between parents and G0d.

[Asker]

Well either you're an absolutist or not. Outright banning abortion is simplistic and vile thing to impose on women. If you stand for free speech, free markets you should stand for free choice. The state should not be interfering in people private lives.

[exitseven]

The situation about abortion is a perfect example of how democrats and their allies in the fake news can take a story ant twist it for their political advantage.
The Supreme Court is not banning abortion like the fake news is telling everyone. They are letting the individual states make the decision. Since we live in a Republic this means that people will have the opportunity to elect people with views similar to their own on this issue. Like everything else, not everyone will get their way.

[Asker]

you really should calm down with your 'fake' accusations. There is nothing fake about this radical shift which will remove the rights of millions of woman. Let me guess you are precious about unborn children but not the thousands of people who are massacred by gun violence? A total ban on abortion anywhere is monstrous for an issue that is very complicated. The far right see everything in simplistic binary terms.

[exitseven]

No, I am pro choice but I am not in favor of having an abortion ten minutes before the woman goes into labor. I am concerned about people who are massacred by guns. Ashlee Babbitt immediately comes to mind. Gang members not so much. And I agree it is a complex issue. I do not see it as a binary issue. The liberals are doing that. Their view is that everyone can get a government funded abortion any time they want and if they are under 18 they can still do it without parental consent. Anything less is just the Republicans taking away everyone's rights/.

[Asker]

I don't think anyone is arguing for having abortions anytime they want. It has to be medical experts that determine this not fox news pundits. The medical science community say 24 weeks unless the mother's life is at risk or the child has a severe disability. The latter is something the mother would have to live with therefore her assessment should take presidence not some hard right keyboard warrior that still lives on his parents basement.

[xHoneyxBeex]

Yes, absolutely. I think it's safe to say though that neither the far right or the far left truly value freedom in the United States. They both claim to want certain "freedoms" while simultaneously proposing limits and restrictions on other individual freedoms.

[demonics]

The government regulates all sorts of choices we make ma'am. Most pro-abortionites have ZERO issue in taking away a mans choice to be a father so spare me. And free speech doesn't require the death of an innocent person. We've already fought that war.

[Asker]

it's un-conservative to be interfering in the private lives of individuals. The far right love big government when it comes to private social issues but they want an ultra liberalised economy. They love clamping down on other peoples rights as long as it doesn't affect themselves.

[NamerOfStars]

Far from it. They're all for choice, giving the options of abstinence, contraception, adoption, or parenthood. You just can't kill your baby.

[Asker]

That doesn't make any sense. So are you in favour of freedom or authoritarianism?

[NamerOfStars]

It makes perfect sense; your rights end where the other person's body begins. Do you object to not being able to shout "fire!" in a crowded theater? Being for freedom doesn't mean no restrictions on anyone's behavior; does it seem nonsensical to you that you can't hunt the homeless for sport or dump nuclear waste on school playgrounds? Are YOU for authoritarianism?

[Asker]

Ah so you do possess some level of nuances.

[Intothevoid666]

We don’t even necessarily want freedom of speech we just don’t want a double standard where liberal ideas are allowed but conservative ideas are censored. U have to admit only censoring one political opinion is pretty ridiculous.

[Asker]

Other than being anti-liberal what do you actually believe in?

[Intothevoid666]

I def wouldn’t say I’m anti liberal. I’m pro abortion, I’m pro lgbtq rights. I was very liberal until I was like 25 and then I started realizing that modern day liberals are just delusional and completely detached from reality. I think the liberal vs conservative dichotomy is unhelpful because it really depends on the time and place. In the dark ages it would have been sensible to support more conservative values where as during the American revolution it would have been more sensible to support more liberal values. I love living in a liberal society but liberalism is inherently unsustainable and I really don’t think we as a society can afford this luxury for too much longer. I really think the west will revert to the dark ages or we will not survive. Maybe that’s a little pessimistic but I think that’s just the reality of the situation.

[Asker]

You love living in a liberal society yet you don't like liberalism? Be careful what you wish for! I don't understand the fear mongering right wing media ranting about how liberalism is bad. There are more important practical issues to resolve instead of abstract ideological arguements about left vs right. If you want rid of liberal values, head over to Russia and see how you like authoritarianism

[Intothevoid666]

I don’t want society to collapse and it will if we continue on down this radical liberal path we are going on that’s kinda just a fact at this point. I don’t like it but I’m not about to be delusional about reality either. The world is a brutal cold harsh place and we need to all stop ignoring that fact.

[slatyb]

The far right is in favor of government control of other people.

[Asker]

Yes aka authoritarianism. The opposite of freedom. Yet they are adamant they want unfettered free speech to insult women and minorities

[Shamalien]

I think freedom of speech and freedom to kill the innocent are two different things…you are never free to kill the innocent. That is always wrong

[Asker]

Unfettered freedom of speech can include inciting hatred which can lead to the killing of innocent people, but you're ok with that?

[Shamalien]

Inciting of hate is a vague definition. Killing of innocent people is obviously wrong, so let’s prosecute that, and let people speak freely.

So to answer your question, yes, I support freedom of speech, because any definition you come up with to limit it is rampant for abuse. People might say that being pro choice is inciting hate towards babies (and actually does lead to the killing of innocent lives) so should you be arrested for expressing a pro choice opinion? No, but prosecuted for killing an innocent child? Perhaps…that’s a different debate and requires nuance in my opinion since some abortions make sense but most can fairly be classified as murder in my opinion.

Point is, let people speak freely. Actions are different. If I offer 10000 to kill someone, that is wrong, that is an action, not just speech. If I say something untrue about someone and it hurts their income, and I am found to be a liar, that is libel, and that is wrong

You should not fuck with freedom of speech, this is the one thing we had pretty much perfect until little tyrants started crybullying

[Asker]

Well at least your not an absolutist and get that these issues are not black and white. Freedom of speech is a good thing generally but the far right abuse it to stir up division which leads to hate which leads to violence. That's the problem. It's insidious.

[Shamalien]

It’s not a problem and it’s not insidious, YOU are the problem if you are trying to limit freedom of speech.

[Asker]

OMFG I'm talking to a moron. Goodbye

[Shamalien]

Indeed, you’re talking to yourself because you hear only what you want to hear. Yes, there are downsides to freedom of speech, but the upsides are 100x more and anyone with a holistic knowledge of history knows this

[Asker]

Mature people have nuanced opinions. The state should not be interfering in people's private lives by telling them what they can and cannot do. Free speech, free choice.

[Shamalien]

I believe in libel laws, and actually offering money to kill people should also be illegal, but beyond that sort of shit there need be no limits. Essentially, one should be allowed to express ANY opinion they want, whether it could lead to violence or not. If I think germans are evil I can say it (I don’t) but I should be able to say it. Politicians are actually crooked evil pedophiles and I have every right to say this. Imagine a world where I go to jail for saying this? One could argue libel, but they’d have to prove it, and no politician wants someone looking into their dirty dealings…

[Asker]

"one should be allowed to express ANY opinion they want, whether it could lead to violence or not" - Wow, that is a truly moronic statement! If thousands of people online started accusing you of being a paedophile without a shred of evidence and that resulted in you being lynched by a mob of conspiracy theory believing thugs, you'd be ok with that?

[Shamalien]

I would sue for libel. Are you really gunna cherrypick once sentence and ignore what I’ve said?

[Asker]

your principle point is that you are defending rampant free speech! you won't be able to sue for libel if the mob get you first because they've heard rumors about you and have decided to lynch. I'm sure at that point you would learn the need for social justice and reasonable constraints on free speech

[Shamalien]

Let’s hear your solution. Freedom of speech has consequences if people wanna be fuckheads like any other system, it’s not utopia but life ent utopia.

So tell me, what limits do you propose? Who is fit to determine truth?

[Asker]

Any speech that constitutes incitement, defamation, fraud, obscenity, hate, fighting words, and threats should be banned and perpetrators punished

[Shamalien]

Oh really? And who gets to be the judge of that? Our current corrupt legal system? Or maybe your magical perfect system?

[Asker]

we have to try and make the system progressively better over time and civilised, not destroy it and replace it with anarchy or authoritarianism

[Shamalien]

What you propose is the definition of authoritarianism.

[Asker]

It has to be medical experts that determine abortion practice not fox news pundits. The medical science community say 24 weeks unless the mother's life is at risk or the child has a severe disability. The latter is something the mother would have to live with therefore her assessment should take presidence not some hard right keyboard warrior that still lives in his parents basement.

[Shamalien]

You don’t think things through. Medical tyranny is not desirable. It is as easily corrupted as any other tyrannical system.

[Asker]

OMG another new catch phrase invented by fox news and the conspiracy theorists. I presume if you were seriously ill you would go to doctor or do you think they are all part of some evil liberal cult? Why get treatment from a medical professional who has done 7 years at med school when you could listen to Trump instead telling you to inject yourself with bleach. Dumb people always mistrust the wrong people. Tell me, if you needed surgery would you trust a surgeon or a fox news pundit to have the expertise?

[Shamalien]

I don’t watch fox news. My words are my own. Try listening to them

[OddBeMe]

Yeah they hate big government except when it comes to immigration or abortion. Or religion.

[Asker]

exactly! they love big government when it comes to private social issues but the want an ultra liberal economy. They love clamping down on other peoples rights as long as it doesn't affect them

[OddBeMe]

Yeah. Liberals like me def have some inconsistencies. But not nearly as hypocritical.

[BillyBalls]

Please cite "The Right to Abort" in the "Bill Of rights".

[Asker]

Perhaps the bill of rights is out of date in the same way the Bible is completely out of date and irrelevant. The Bill of Rights was written in 1791 and has been updated numerous times to adapt to modern society. You far right morons always see the world in such a simplistic binary way.

[BillyBalls]

First, how do you know I am a Rightie?

Second, if i was it would be I would be of high intelligence not moronic!

[Asker]

your questions am i rightie makes no sense, speak English please

[joeldalton]

The freedom to choose to do what?

[LazerBean]

To kill their babies.

[Asker]

@LazerBean so you're against freedom?

[joeldalton]

The freedom to do what, asker?

[LazerBean]

I'm not against freedom at all, I believe everyone has the freedom to do whatever they want as long as it does not hurt another human.