5 ms·

Freedom of speech isn't freedom to be a bigot. You can say whatever you want, but that doesn't mean the rest of the world has to listen.

JadeNB 5y ago
> Freedom of speech isn't freedom to be a bigot. You can say whatever you want, but that doesn't mean the rest of the world has to listen. To be clear, it is freedom to be a bigot, or at least to say bigoted things, just not freedom to have anyone else listen to those things (or, as hopefully goes without saying, for any action based on those bigoted things that goes beyond words).
- wizzwizz4 5y ago
  > just not freedom to have anyone else listen to those things This implies freedom to remember you say bigoted things and proactively avoid you.
  - JadeNB 5y ago
    > This implies freedom to remember you say bigoted things and proactively avoid you. Certainly. Freedom of speech, not freedom from consequences, as they say.
    - dane-pgp 5y ago
      “There is freedom of speech, but I cannot guarantee freedom after speech.” ― Idi Amin https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/9082497-there-is-freedom-of-speech-but-i-cannot-guarantee-freedom https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/9082497-there-is-freedom-of...
      - JadeNB 5y ago
        That's not the company into which I'd prefer to be lumped as a believer in free speech with consequences. I'm not sure whether or not that was your point ….
        dane-pgp 5y ago
        I'm saying that unless you're really careful to specify what sort of "consequences" you're talking about, it's hard to separate your beliefs from his.
        JadeNB 5y ago
        > I'm saying that unless you're really careful to specify what sort of "consequences" you're talking about, it's hard to separate your beliefs from his. Since you refer to them as "my beliefs", I assume that yours are different. With no sarcasm, what are your beliefs? If you argue against the claim that freedom of speech does not entail freedom from consequences, is your position that freedom of speech should come with freedom from consequences? Surely it's not hard to imagine how that, too, can be a dangerous position to take.
        FeepingCreature 5y ago
        Different poster, but I believe that freedom of speech not just does, but must come with freedom from consequences to be at all meaningful. Of course, there is nowhere that actually has that level of freedom of speech, but seen as a spectrum it makes sense. Freedom of speech is freedom from consequences: - of government reprisals - of corporate reprisals - of criminal reprisals - of employment risks - of relationship risks. Pick and choose which matter to you. To me, freedom of speech applies to all, but other rights such as freedom of association sometimes override it. (And sometimes not.)
        shadowgovt 5y ago
        The only speech that has no impact on that entire spectrum of human interaction is things never said. I don't think people generally want a lack of response to their speech (if they did, they're saying nothing... Just making babbling noises best ignored). People want freedom from negative consequences. In short, people want to eat their cake and have their cake. This is why every country ends up with laws that carve out some spectrum of consequences as inappropriate, but those laws are not all-encompassing... It is functionally impossible to eliminate all the consequences you've listed from the table while still giving listeners freedom to be their own independent agents and modify their behavior in reaction to speech. In particular, the last category you listed is a huge infringement on personal liberty of generally applied... I assume you don't expect a person in a committed relationship, hearing their partner say "I hate everything about my partner and I wish we'd never met," to not modify or end the relationship? Any legal infringement on their right to do so is an obvious curtailment of their rights. In short, sometimes freedom of speech and freedom of association collide. One is a freedom of the speaker, the other freedom of the listener.
stjohnswarts 5y ago
Exactly it's why I send money to ACLU and EFF. I'll spend money to help defend your right to say what you want, but I'll be damned if I have to listen to your BS on my own time. I'm just there to stop the government from outlawing freedom of speech.

JadeNB 5y ago

> Freedom of speech isn't freedom to be a bigot. You can say whatever you want, but that doesn't mean the rest of the world has to listen. To be clear, it is freedom to be a bigot, or at least to say bigoted things, just not freedom to have anyone else listen to those things (or, as hopefully goes without saying, for any action based on those bigoted things that goes beyond words).

wizzwizz4 5y ago
> just not freedom to have anyone else listen to those things This implies freedom to remember you say bigoted things and proactively avoid you.
- JadeNB 5y ago
  > This implies freedom to remember you say bigoted things and proactively avoid you. Certainly. Freedom of speech, not freedom from consequences, as they say.
  - dane-pgp 5y ago
    “There is freedom of speech, but I cannot guarantee freedom after speech.” ― Idi Amin https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/9082497-there-is-freedom-of-speech-but-i-cannot-guarantee-freedom https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/9082497-there-is-freedom-of...
    - JadeNB 5y ago
      That's not the company into which I'd prefer to be lumped as a believer in free speech with consequences. I'm not sure whether or not that was your point ….
      - dane-pgp 5y ago
        I'm saying that unless you're really careful to specify what sort of "consequences" you're talking about, it's hard to separate your beliefs from his.
        JadeNB 5y ago
        > I'm saying that unless you're really careful to specify what sort of "consequences" you're talking about, it's hard to separate your beliefs from his. Since you refer to them as "my beliefs", I assume that yours are different. With no sarcasm, what are your beliefs? If you argue against the claim that freedom of speech does not entail freedom from consequences, is your position that freedom of speech should come with freedom from consequences? Surely it's not hard to imagine how that, too, can be a dangerous position to take.
        FeepingCreature 5y ago
        Different poster, but I believe that freedom of speech not just does, but must come with freedom from consequences to be at all meaningful. Of course, there is nowhere that actually has that level of freedom of speech, but seen as a spectrum it makes sense. Freedom of speech is freedom from consequences: - of government reprisals - of corporate reprisals - of criminal reprisals - of employment risks - of relationship risks. Pick and choose which matter to you. To me, freedom of speech applies to all, but other rights such as freedom of association sometimes override it. (And sometimes not.)
        shadowgovt 5y ago
        The only speech that has no impact on that entire spectrum of human interaction is things never said. I don't think people generally want a lack of response to their speech (if they did, they're saying nothing... Just making babbling noises best ignored). People want freedom from negative consequences. In short, people want to eat their cake and have their cake. This is why every country ends up with laws that carve out some spectrum of consequences as inappropriate, but those laws are not all-encompassing... It is functionally impossible to eliminate all the consequences you've listed from the table while still giving listeners freedom to be their own independent agents and modify their behavior in reaction to speech. In particular, the last category you listed is a huge infringement on personal liberty of generally applied... I assume you don't expect a person in a committed relationship, hearing their partner say "I hate everything about my partner and I wish we'd never met," to not modify or end the relationship? Any legal infringement on their right to do so is an obvious curtailment of their rights. In short, sometimes freedom of speech and freedom of association collide. One is a freedom of the speaker, the other freedom of the listener.

stjohnswarts 5y ago

Exactly it's why I send money to ACLU and EFF. I'll spend money to help defend your right to say what you want, but I'll be damned if I have to listen to your BS on my own time. I'm just there to stop the government from outlawing freedom of speech.