> We don't ask "how is a wheelchair user determined" or whatever. Because it’s obvious who’s in a wheelchair and who isn’t. Why does it appear difficult for y

> We don't ask "how is a wheelchair user determined" or whatever. Because it’s obvious who’s in a wheelchair and who isn’t. Why does it appear difficult for you to explain un/popularity with regard to free speech though? If you want to make the point that popularity could be determined by case law then that sounds fair, I mean it’s an idea I would look into myself at least. But you’ve already deemed that to be irrelevant to your own point. It’s like you shot yourself in the foot. I appreciate the assistance though.