On Wednesday, 24 March 2021 11:38:25 PM AEDT Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Freedom of speech does *not* mean freedom from consequences.
Here is a good reply to this very statement:
~~~
"Freedom of speech is supposed to imply freedom from quite a wide range
of possible consequences; mostly consequences like fines or incarceration,
but the spirit of it applies more broadly than that. If I were to say that
[whoever] is free to speak, but I wouldn’t guarantee there would be no
consequences for that speech, wouldn’t it be fair to interpret my words
as a veiled threat?
The only valid “consequences” for an act of free speech is a solid rebuttal.
If you think otherwise, then I suggest that you haven’t quite grasped the
point of the concept, or that you simply have tyrannical tendencies
(as many do).
~~~
Taken from the following conversation:
https://shadowtolight.wordpress.com/2021/02/07/friendly-atheist-defends-censorhip/
--
All the best,
Dmitry Smirnov
GPG key : 4096R/52B6BBD953968D1B
---
It's a nonsense assumption that you can get rid of terrorism with war.
Terrorism is taking the lives of innocent people to gain your objective.
War is basically the same thing on a larger scale.
-- Gene Sharp
---
Your Facebook friends are wrong about the lockdown. A non-hysterics's guide
to COVID-19 by Tom Woods.
-- https://wrongaboutlockdown.com/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.