> No, parent is saying freedom of speech is a consequence of democracy Then you'll need to explain these questions: > What prior-to-democracy system would lea

> No, parent is saying freedom of speech is a consequence of democracy Then you'll need to explain these questions: > What prior-to-democracy system would lead toward that free speech? Or do you believe free speech exists by itself in nature, prior to any system? Without them I might agree. With them, the inference is impossible to ignore. > Freedom of speech has almost always been a consequence of modern democracy. No one was saying anything else. It's starting to look like you aren't going to shine a light on what I've missed but what you've missed. > Your flippant response in the last paragraph makes me believe you aren't convinced in your argumentation either. Flippancy is a manifestation of doubt, now there's a claim I've not heard before. The world is indeed full of wonder and mystery!