Politics & News

Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Conservatives act like they’re the face of free speech, but they ask for censorship when the speech is troublesome to them.

Few people are actually free speech absolutists. Rather than be a hypocrite, admit there are legal things you believe should be censored, suppressed, and shut down.

Top | Newest First | Oldest First

Graylight · 51-55, F

@Mamapolo2016 Oh, I think it happens on both sides, but by far the screaming about disrespecting the flag, a [i]symbol[/i] of the nation and its principles, comes from the right.

[i]Opinions are deeply divided along partisan, racial and ethnic lines. Fully 86 percent of Republicans said it’s never appropriate to kneel during the national anthem as a form of protest. That drops down to just about half of independents (51 percent) and less than 3 in 10 Democrats (29 percent) who said the same; 66 percent of Democrats said protesting the anthem is sometimes appropriate.[/i]
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2018/05/23/poll-53-percent-of-americans-say-its-never-appropriate-to-kneel-during-the-national-anthem/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ed9c31b2b905

[i]Almost 9 in 10 Republicans say it's the wrong thing [kneeling] (87%) while just about three-quarters of Democrats say the opposite (72%). And most younger Americans call it the right thing (56% among those under age 45) while a majority of older Americans say it's wrong (59% among those age 45 or older). [/i]
https://www.cnn.com/2017/09/29/politics/national-anthem-nfl-cnn-poll/index.html

Mamapolo2016 · F

@Graylight I have heard here the proposition that people over a certain age be blocked from voting because they vote 'wrong.'

Certainly not prevalent, but existing.

The issue is not insanity on one side or another. It is insanity.

If I chose to scavenge numbers, I could, but it's pointless. I am a) not Republican, b) do not believe taking a knee is wrong or evil and is entirely acceptable and American [b]if you are willing to brave it and accept the consequences. [/b]

The consequences come from the employer, not the government, because they are taking a knee on the clock. I applaud them for their courage and commitment, if they accept the consequences.

Great political freedom movements succeeded because the consequences were known, in fact were sought.

If you don't believe what you believe powerfully enough to brave the consequences, you don't believe it powerfully enough.

Today's political exchange consists of 'you shut up. [b][i]I[/i][/b] have the right to say what I think.

Graylight · 51-55, F

@Mamapolo2016 Indeed. But the consequences exist only if players are in violation of a known employee policy. When this started (and still perhaps now), the NFL had no such policy.

Mamapolo2016 · F

@Graylight I don't know what companies you have worked for. the companies I have worked for are perfectly comfortable with developing new policies to address a situation that never arose before. I don't want to play legal 'gotcha' anyway.

Legality and common sense and conviction are not the same concepts.

If we pay you a kabillion dollars for your talent and effort and popularity and you refuse to pay a kabillionth for your convictions, one of us has stronger convictions than the other.

I am withdrawing before this gets heated because that accomplishes zilch. You have the last word.

Heartlander · 80-89, M

I'm trying to connect between being a free speech absolutist and a hypocrite. The 1st amendment is like the 2nd amendment that grants freedoms but the freedom doesn't muffle the consequences for using the freedom recklessly. We all probably know the consequences of reckless use of a firearm. There are also consequences for reckless use of speech.

katielass · F

@Heartlander well said.

SW-User

@Heartlander

My point is that conservatives often call people "snowflake" and "PC" when they are offended by speech and want it censored, but conservatives do the same type of thing. They may not do it for the same type of speech, but the actions are the same. The sense of offense and the desire to see that offensive speech eradicated is the same. To call out actions that you yourself take is hypocritical. That's all I meant.

katielass · F

@SW-User Oh dear. Conservatives call liberals snowflakes because they can't handle an opposing opinion, they need safe spaces to shield them from opposing opinions. It has nothing to do with speech conservatives don't like. That's precisely why I told you it's not conservatives who are trying to squash speech, it's the liberals who are doing that. You can't find even one example of conservatives trying to shut down speech but there is a plethora of examples of snowflake violence doing just that.

KingofPizza2 · 36-40, M

And so many (on all sides) are so quick to cry "First Amendment violation!" when it has nothing to do with government censorship.

SW-User

@KingofPizza2 Yep. There are many who seem never to have read the text of the 1st amendment.

Mamapolo2016 · F

Almost nobody is in favor of free speech when it disagrees with the speeches they themselves give.

Statements like yours above affect me like fingernails on a chalkboard and they come from all sides of the political spectrum.

Statements like this are usually preparing the way for, 'and therefore we cannot allow them to speak freely.'

Perhaps your statement is not intended that way.

If you notice, not only here, but especially here, anyone touting racial supremacy or other extreme philosophies, immediately delete contrary comments.

If your philosophy cannot withstand debate, it is a weak and flawed philosophy.

I wander down the middle of the road but probably tend slightly toward the right berm, for purposes of categorization.

SW-User

@Mamapolo2016 It’s not intended that way. Liberals call for censorship all the time and I’m not defending them.

Mamapolo2016 · F

@SW-User Good. I'll sit by you.

Graylight · 51-55, F

[image deleted]
They complain (misguidedly) that they're being kept from social media outlets while polling in favor of media censorship. Still, I think most people value free speech and everyone's right to it. It's just that those who practice unevenly seem to speak the loudest.

Mamapolo2016 · F

@Graylight If you think that is one-sided, listen closer. It's egregious at both extremes.

sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M

Makes one wonder why Ocasio-Cortez is prohibiting the media from reporting on her campaign.

View 4 more replies »

sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M

@Graylight Fact is she is a flaming liberal, promising free everything for everybody, and with no clue on how it is going to be paid for, and by whom. Just another example on how worthless a college education is nowadays.

Graylight · 51-55, F

@sunsporter1649 Funny how those without college educations are the one to disparage them.

Wanting equality, services and opportunity for all doesn’t mean "giving free stuff away." There are ways to accomplish this successfully, as evidenced all over the globe.

sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M

@Graylight University of Miami, class of '77, Psyc Major.

Sure is evidence all over the world, such as Argentina, North Korea, China, Russia, Iran, Iraq....the list goes on and on. Funny how those countries that adhere to capitalism, where you get what you earn, seem to be the most successful.

akindheart · 61-69, F

AMEN!!! you got it!

SW-User

I agree that some conservatives do that. However, I also think that what people try to classify under "freedom of speech" these days is often not that at all. There are also legitimate and legal limits to free speech which seem to be ignored when it's convenient.

SW-User

@SW-User Of course. Death threats, libel, etc. are illegal for a reason. And private institutions can choose what speech they wish to host. But of what’s legal, no matter how distasteful I find it, I can’t defend censoring it.

hertoy · 70-79, M

Can you site an example of conservatism against free speech?

View 5 more replies »

softspokenman · M

He violated: 1. Perjury of oath. 2. Abuse of authority. 3. Intimidation. 4. Behavior unbecoming.
High crimes and misdemeanors

(Added)@softspokenman

softspokenman · M

Nonviolent assembly and protest in public are protected by the 1st Amendment, freedom of speech.

Added@softspokenman

softspokenman · M

Speech and even hate speech are protected under the 1st Amendment. @SW-User

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

OKWTF2 · 51-55, M

True, but very disappointing how violent the other side has become on speech that is different from theirs.

SW-User

@OKWTF2 I find it disappointing too.

katielass · F

It isn't conservatives who are using violence to shut speech down.

SW-User

@katielass Not defending the liberals who do that. They are despicable.

katielass · F

@SW-User I didn't say you were defending them but your post implies it's conservatives who are the ones squashing speech and that's not true. In fact I can't think of even one example. Maybe I'm missing something?

workathome · 51-55, M

yes, they say a lot of things, but show us don't tell us!

Add a comment...