3 ms·
How naive are you? I would say that an ideology that advocates for racial or ethnic cleansing should not be shared. I would say that sexually explicit images
by Delmania 9y ago
How naive are you? I would say that an ideology that advocates for racial or ethnic cleansing should not be shared. I would say that sexually explicit images of children who are emotionally traumatized should not be shared. As someone mentioned above, when the speech advocates for the harming of other people, it should not be shared.
- 13years 9y agoYet this is exactly why speech must be protected. Speech is always lost in the interest of what would appear the public good. You start with what most would agree to be speech that should not be shared. Some entity must then be given power to determine what qualifies as that speech. This is then the point speech is lost. Once someone has the power to determine what people can say, then that becomes the vehicle through which it will be undermined. The definition of what is acceptable will continue to change as the state will want to keep expanding its power of `public good`. This becomes a selling point to the public to support such efforts while the state will continue to silence opposition to its interests with support of the public as all will be framed in the interest of protecting the public.