4 ms·
Sure there is; Young and Mitchell have made an active decision to shutdown their own speech or the speech of another. The difference is taking an action against
by mmcgaha 5y ago
Sure there is; Young and Mitchell have made an active decision to shutdown their own speech or the speech of another. The difference is taking an action against another vs taking an action against yourself.
I am sure that you will agree that determining your own outcome is freedom but forcing an outcome for others is oppression.
- mulmen 5y agoThey are not shutting down their speech. They are exercising it by choosing who to associate with. The first amendment does not protect you from the actions of other private parties, it protects you from the government. I realize this is a cliche but it is critical to understand. Freedom of speech means you can say "I don't like what that person says and they shouldn't say it." And everyone else is free to agree with you or not.
- School-Cotton 5y ago> The first amendment does not protect you from the actions of other private parties, it protects you from the government. Nobody in this thread was talking about the First Amendment. The concept of freedom of speech is much broader than its particular realization in US constitutional law.
- mulmen 5y agoFair enough. I do not believe anyone is or should be entitled to an audience. I do not believe anyone is obligated to speak.