If you honestly think that free speech is saying whatever you want, you are either ignorant, or you support pedophilia.
If anyone can say whatever they want, there is no reason an adult cannot have graphic sexual conversations with a child. Anything that stops that would be a violation of allowing people to say whatever they want, and that wouldn’t be free speech would it?
If you think that adults shouldn’t be able to have graphic sexual conversations with random children, or create explicit spoken or written fiction about such acts, then you believe that there are constraints that can or should be placed on speech. It’s really that simple.
If we can prohibit pedophiles from saying those things or creating fictions of language about them, then you believe that speech can be constrained to prevent harm or stop things that are just sick from a humanitarian perspective.
If you believe that- you believe that other things can be curtailed without destroying free speech.
So either this guy is correct that “free speech doesn’t mean saying whatever you want,” or you believe that free speech should enshrine the rights to written and spoken child pornography and sexual conversations between adults and children , along with anything else including false advertising, dangerous medical advice, false accusations of crimes that never happened, slander, etc. if you believe saying whatever you want is free speech then you believe that Amber Heard was just exercising her rights and shouldn’t face legal consequences.
Dead reader, you probably draw the line somewhere, and I jumped right to the one 99% of people wouldn’t support. My words are true, if you believe free speech is anyone saying anything and having that legally protected, you either didn’t think this through to you are a sick human being. Look in the mirror, think it over, maybe come back afterwards with which camp you want to be in.
I get what you are saying - Butters... but i think it's more about intent and inflection. Shout fire after a great song, nobody cares, walk into a movie theater and yell it... bad things will happen. As for the sex talk, wait til they ask or turn 13.. if they ask, take them to a private place where someone else's kids can't hear you. Nobody wants to raise a Butters giving football players his cum as a physical enhancer. I also found it hilarious it was randy who figured it out... like, yeah he def has tasted cum before.
Lol. That was funny- but I meant less talk of “birds and bees” and more “sexting” or “cyber sex.” These things are just speech. Just talking. If ALL speech must be free for it to be free speech, then no person who believes this has grounds to prevent an adult from having “cybersex” or dirty talk for the purpose of sexual gratification with any other person. hard core “all speech is fre speech” proponents hold that a government or corporation does not have grounds to prevent people from saying what they like as they like where public speech is allowed. They hold that in essence- it shouldn’t be illegal to say what you want, people can decide what they think and listen or not listen, but no one should be able to silence even an unpopular message. The hardest hardcore “free speech” advocate believes that “free speech” is even above social consequences.
They would bemoan “cancel culture” for “censoring” those who say things that others don’t agree with. Paradoxically, they believe that what a comedian for example says should be allowed as “free speech,” and that those who would use their freedom to refuse to listen or to tell others their opinion on the material are standing against free speech. The logic cannot be reconciled using a defense of free speech, like many “defenders of freedom” a good deal of these people don’t really care about the freedom, they just want for them and those like minded people to be free to do as THEY please.
But as I say, and if someone can refute it I am game- if a person believes in absolute freedom of speech they support sexting with children.
If anyone can say whatever they want, there is no reason an adult cannot have graphic sexual conversations with a child. Anything that stops that would be a violation of allowing people to say whatever they want, and that wouldn’t be free speech would it?
If you think that adults shouldn’t be able to have graphic sexual conversations with random children, or create explicit spoken or written fiction about such acts, then you believe that there are constraints that can or should be placed on speech. It’s really that simple.
If we can prohibit pedophiles from saying those things or creating fictions of language about them, then you believe that speech can be constrained to prevent harm or stop things that are just sick from a humanitarian perspective.
If you believe that- you believe that other things can be curtailed without destroying free speech.
Dead reader, you probably draw the line somewhere, and I jumped right to the one 99% of people wouldn’t support. My words are true, if you believe free speech is anyone saying anything and having that legally protected, you either didn’t think this through to you are a sick human being. Look in the mirror, think it over, maybe come back afterwards with which camp you want to be in.
But as I say, and if someone can refute it I am game- if a person believes in absolute freedom of speech they support sexting with children.