3 ms·

> Freedom of speech is an ideal that applies to all people and all spaces, public and private Private spaces? Nonsense. You can't go in to a restaurant and s

> Freedom of speech is an ideal that applies to all people and all spaces, public and private Private spaces? Nonsense. You can't go in to a restaurant and start ranting about the Jews or whatever, and then say that they're violating the "ideal of free speech" when they kick you out. Free speech means you get to espouse an idea, not force people to hear it. The disagreement is about whether Twitter is a public or private space. It seems to me to be pretty obviously private, and AFAICT the people who argue that it's public don't have much justification beyond "I want it to be, because I or someone I like got kicked out."

KyleBerezin 4y ago
Freedom of speech isn't a law, it is a concept. If you are in a private space and insult someone, they may choose to not 'turn the other cheek'. Does that mean 'turning the other cheek' can't be applied in private spaces? They are both concepts, not laws.
- ineptech 4y ago
  This is so abstract as to be meaningless, I have no idea what you're arguing or what you think "applied" means in this context. Does the concept of "free speech" mean you ought to be able to scream the n word in a Wendy's without being asked to leave? If not, my point is that Twitter is no different; if yes, then you and I mean very different things by "free speech".
  - KyleBerezin 4y ago
    It is abstract, and the argument is semantic. Freedom of speech is an concept, turning the cheek is a concept. Most people agree neither should be applied absolutely, but they both can be applied or ignored in any space, private or public. There are laws that try to codify the concepts. The 1st amendment is one of such laws, but it only applies to the US government. It doesn't mean that the concept it is based on is held to the same restrictions.
    - ineptech 4y ago
      "Private space" is also a concept. There's such a thing as being too abstract, and specific trumps general.

KyleBerezin 4y ago

Freedom of speech isn't a law, it is a concept. If you are in a private space and insult someone, they may choose to not 'turn the other cheek'. Does that mean 'turning the other cheek' can't be applied in private spaces? They are both concepts, not laws.

ineptech 4y ago
This is so abstract as to be meaningless, I have no idea what you're arguing or what you think "applied" means in this context. Does the concept of "free speech" mean you ought to be able to scream the n word in a Wendy's without being asked to leave? If not, my point is that Twitter is no different; if yes, then you and I mean very different things by "free speech".
- KyleBerezin 4y ago
  It is abstract, and the argument is semantic. Freedom of speech is an concept, turning the cheek is a concept. Most people agree neither should be applied absolutely, but they both can be applied or ignored in any space, private or public. There are laws that try to codify the concepts. The 1st amendment is one of such laws, but it only applies to the US government. It doesn't mean that the concept it is based on is held to the same restrictions.
  - ineptech 4y ago
    "Private space" is also a concept. There's such a thing as being too abstract, and specific trumps general.