4 ms·
Elon has always been clear that he supports free speech within the law as the U.S. courts and constitution have defined it. This means not allowing things like
by jlawson 3y ago
Elon has always been clear that he supports free speech within the law as the U.S. courts and constitution have defined it.
This means not allowing things like direct calls to immediate violence, child pornography, fraud, blackmail, and libel.
Him wanting restrictions on the above things does not make him a hypocrite, it makes him reasonable. Take his words seriously, not literally. Let's move past the "gotchas" please.
- jameskilton 3y agoExcept the legal filing we're discussion here is a direct contradiction of everything you just said. > Other times, a complaint is so unabashedly and vociferously about one thing that there can be no mistaking that purpose. This case represents the latter circumstance. This case is about punishing the Defendants for their speech.
- drcongo 3y agoDid you read the OP?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- wnevets 3y agoHow is any that related to this judge's verdict? Your definition of absolutist must be very different than mine.
- pcwalton 3y agoA U.S. court has now weighed in on that question and has decided that Elon attempted to stifle free speech as the U.S. courts and Constitution has defined it.
- dragonwriter 3y ago> Elon has always been clear that he supports free speech within the law as the U.S. courts and constitution have defined it. Yes, he tends to claim that. In this case, however, he was found by a court to be abusing the legal system for the specific purpose of using the government to suppress speech that is legal in the United States, and sanctioned for that abuse.