5 ms·
You say it is not free speech absolutism, but in the same paragraph you say that any sort of limitation of speech or belief that some thoughts are simply bad is
by krageon 4y ago
You say it is not free speech absolutism, but in the same paragraph you say that any sort of limitation of speech or belief that some thoughts are simply bad is something only idiots want or have. It doesn't read as a well-rounded belief that came about from measured, reasonable thinking. It just reads as if you're angry.
- colonCapitalDee 4y agoYou failed to understand my comment and then made an ad hominem attack, how impressive
- krageon 4y agoHow is asserting that you're angry an ad hominem attack? Has it somehow become a crime to have emotions, or to express them instead of pure cold logic? There was no ad hominem.
- mihaic 4y agoDid you maybe skim the comment and not actually read it? My interpretation was that not letting people even voice some state-of-the-world opinions is an excessive speach limitation. I do read the anger though, but I feel it's not the destructive kind, more the disappointed at the state of public discourse.
- kragen 4y agoi have no relationship to the parent poster, who has unfortunately chosen a name confusingly similar to my own