<< just like other countries have. I moved from the old country partly cuz of Lèse-majesté laws regarding ruling elite and clergy. Forgive me, but other countr

<< just like other countries have. I moved from the old country partly cuz of Lèse-majesté laws regarding ruling elite and clergy. Forgive me, but other countries having X type laws does not automatically constitute a valid argument to enact anything similar here. I now personally see it as an indirect way to circumvent original framework of this country having failed to do it directly. In short, I am going to use a very, very old argument. If everyone jumped off of a bridge, would you do it too? << is more free when it's not stifled by hate. Fascinating statement and I would love you to elaborate further, because to me it is contradictory. Freedom of speech is called freedom of speech for a reason. It is not called freedom with asterisk to account for other person's perception of your communication. That is not freedom. It is the opposite of freedom. Frankly, what you are proposing inevitably results in an echo chamber. It is cool if that if it is what you want. It is not what I want. You seem reasonable. I am willing to engage. Convince me 'free speech' is more free when it is restricted.