free speech - the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint.
This website is clearly against it
free speech - the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint.
This website is clearly against it
I'm for it, as long as it doesn't contain inciting to violence or death threats. Every religion, culture, ideology, ethnic, organization, person... has to accept criticism or having questioned credibility of their goals.
Simple minds do not understand-you agreed to the rules and terms of service in exchange for setting up your account. Nowhere does it tell you that you can say whatever you like without consequence. There are rules and decorum. They're privately owned and can choose what to allow. Think of it as a business reserving the right to refuse service to anyone. If you don't follow the rules, they exercise their right to refuse you service.
If, hypothetically, I said the Asker's real name is (your name), he lives at (your address) and he's been sexually abusing his children since they were 2, would you want that left up?
I'm for it to an extent. If you're saying something that is mean just to hurt someone, then I don't agree with it
Opinion
5Opinion
I’m for free speech when it comes to government regulation but privately owned websites are a much different matter. They should be able to run their own platforms as they see fit. It’s arrogant to think you can use something someone else created and provides to you for free and you don’t have to abide by their rules. The sense of entitlement in this country is breathtaking sometimes.
@Pterodon Private entities do not have to abide by the first amendment. That is not part of the text or history of the constitution. Ignorance in this country is as breathtaking as the entitlement.
@Pterodon Good God. That is incorrect on every level. People have pursued such nonsense in court and predictably lost. The first amendment, like the entire Bill of Rights, is applied to the government. It’s stunning how ignorant many Americans are about our own constitution.
@Pterodon If this is even real, without a court ruling to look at, I can only speculate. The case probably centered on housing discrimination laws, possibly the Fair Housing Act, and not a constitutional issue, especially since children have very limited constitutional rights anyway. Again, you’re way off base. What you’re proposing doesn’t exist, nor has ever existed in this nation’s history.
The constitution is a framework for the government. The government can then pass laws that affect private entities. How has this fact escaped a 61-year old man for so long?
@Pterodon That case centered around the constitutionality of state anti-discrimination laws. Got any other irrelevant observations?
Christ, it’s scary that people ignorant of our constitutional system are even allowed to vote. How do you make informed decisions on candidates and public policy when you are ignorant of how the system works? Most high school freshmen could explain the constitution better than this guy.
People who rail for free speech generally are for speaking what they feel. Somehow they shirk control.
I love that 9/10 people just vote no to spite you. And the only person who voted yes is iron man. Great job troll jr.
Within reason. Free speech isn't a license to insult people.
I'm a conservative and for free speech. Liberals hate free speech.
it depends some stuff should be censored.
for free speech
In general, I'm for free speech.
their site, their rules.
I’m for free speech
well. sort of both
Against it.
You can also add your opinion below!