Your comment has two separate arguments, if I'm not missing something: 1. rights do not exist outside of the constitution 2. freedom of speech is not enough a

Your comment has two separate arguments, if I'm not missing something: 1. rights do not exist outside of the constitution 2. freedom of speech is not enough as defined now.* Regarding 1, you should propose where else would rights be defined and defended. Currently, the issue could be mitigated, if the constitution is opened for additions and closed for deletions. Not absolutely, but sufficiently close to discourage abuse. Regarding freedom of speech, the issue is not the right itself, but the fact that matters of public debate happen on a few private properties. The right of property and personal liberty means that you cannot force someone to do your work for free, so if you want free public space, this space should be either provided by the government or it should be a shared public responsibility a.k.a distributed social network. * in the US, I'm not from there.