>Free speech wasn’t supposed to have carve outs. Sorry to be a stickler, but what exactly are you referring to here? This statement is demonstrably false at t

>Free speech wasn’t supposed to have carve outs. Sorry to be a stickler, but what exactly are you referring to here? This statement is demonstrably false at the principle level, even in Mills' work, let alone in the enabling constitutional, legislative, or treaty-based implementations of Free Speech. We can have a sound discussion about the optimal place a society should land upon on the more restrictions vs. less restrictions spectrum, but to pretend that the only way the system works is at precisely zero limits warps the conversation and prevents us from taking a deep look into the issue.