3 ms·
Better example would be anti-vaxxers. You can point to actual cases of dead children and say this is the penalty of free speech. Speaking of which, why is ant
by Lawtonfogle 11y ago
Better example would be anti-vaxxers. You can point to actual cases of dead children and say this is the penalty of free speech.
Speaking of which, why is anti-vaxxer rhetoric protected even though it contributes to the harm of children. I can think of illegal speech that was banned because of it being harmful to children (and which is likely less lethal than anti-vaxxer rhetoric).
- msandford 11y ago> I can think of illegal speech that was banned because of it being harmful to children (and which is likely less lethal than anti-vaxxer rhetoric). That's very interesting. Could you elaborate please? I'd really like to know more.
- Lawtonfogle 11y agoImages/videos are considered speech. There was actually a few different First Amendment cases concerning different images/videos being made illegal, but of those only one ban clearly stuck (a second ban was struck down but reinstated with slightly different laws and is still waiting a second SCOTUS ruling on it). (As a side note to any lawyers, is text protected speech when it originates as a description of an actual harmful act of which video/images would not be legal speech? I don't think it was made illegal, but I wonder if it could be (at least if it were at some level of detail).)
- msandford 11y agoAh, okay that makes a lot more sense then. Thanks for sharing!