The right to freedom of speech: What it is and isn't

[AlexanderG]

I came across this article by Ben Shapiro (I know...) entitled "America's silent majority must fight liberals killing freedom of speech." Granted, it's Ben Shapiro so he may be intentionally misleading people since I'm sure he's aware of basic Constitutional law, but he exploits a common misconception in this piece.

In fact, the right to freedom of speech in the US, granted by the First Amendment, prohibits the government from imposing penalties on most forms of speech, whether political, religious, or otherwise. The government, and the government alone, cannot fine, jail, deny services, discriminate against, or otherwise punish people in the US for expressing their viewpoint unless that speech imposes a significant risk of imminent harm, or falls into a few other rare exceptions.

Unlike what that article suggests:

1. People not liking you because they think you're a horrible person based on what you've said, does not violate your freedom of speech.
2. Your boss warning you not to say offensive things because it will hurt the company's reputation does not violate your freedom of speech.
3. People boycotting you because they think you're horrible and don't want to give you their money does not violate your freedom of speech.
4. People disagreeing with you and saying critical things about your opinions, beliefs, or behavior does not violate your freedom of speech.
5. Corporations canceling your account or pulling your ads has nothing to do with your right of freedom of speech. If anything, the corporation's freedom of speech allows it to regulate the content of its platform and associations, free of government interference.

Please take a moment to understand this, if you weren't aware.

The old adage goes, "When you've been living with privilege, equality feels like oppression." A lot of US conservatives are coming to realize that they've effectively lost the culture war. A growing US majority no longer agrees with their views, and in fact finds their views immoral and harmful. This may be jarring to someone who is used to getting their way and having society agree with them, but this phenomenon is entirely unrelated to the right of freedom of speech.

There is no legally actionable harm. There is no redress owed to you. It's just that lots of people think you're a jerk and don't like you. Ultimately, you can either get used to this reaction or stop being a jerk, but no one is violating your rights.

 

[Revoltingest]

It reminds me of how some say I'm abridging the
rights of others by requiring vaccination to rent
an apartment from me. But they don't recognize
my right to set reasonable conditions for living
in my place of business. My property, my rules, eh.

 

[icehorse]

I think that if you read the Shapiro article carefully, it mostly agrees with the OP.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I came across this article by Ben Shapiro (I know...) entitled "America's silent majority must fight liberals killing freedom of speech." Granted, it's Ben Shapiro so he may be intentionally misleading people since I'm sure he's aware of basic Constitutional law, but he exploits a common misconception in this piece.

In fact, the right to freedom of speech in the US, granted by the First Amendment, prohibits the government from imposing penalties on most forms of speech, whether political, religious, or otherwise. The government, and the government alone, cannot fine, jail, deny services, discriminate against, or otherwise punish people in the US for expressing their viewpoint unless that speech imposes a significant risk of imminent harm, or falls into a few other rare exceptions.

Unlike what that article suggests:

1. People not liking you because they think you're a horrible person based on what you've said, does not violate your freedom of speech.
2. Your boss warning you not to say offensive things because it will hurt the company's reputation does not violate your freedom of speech.
3. People boycotting you because they think you're horrible and don't want to give you their money does not violate your freedom of speech.
4. People disagreeing with you and saying critical things about your opinions, beliefs, or behavior does not violate your freedom of speech.
5. Corporations canceling your account or pulling your ads has nothing to do with your right of freedom of speech. If anything, the corporation's freedom of speech allows it to regulate the content of its platform and associations, free of government interference.

Please take a moment to understand this, if you weren't aware.

The old adage goes, "When you've been living with privilege, equality feels like oppression." A lot of US conservatives are coming to realize that they've effectively lost the culture war. A growing US majority no longer agrees with their views, and in fact finds their views immoral and harmful. This may be jarring to someone who is used to getting their way and having society agree with them, but this phenomenon is entirely unrelated to the right of freedom of speech.

There is no legally actionable harm. There is no redress owed to you. It's just that lots of people think you're a jerk and don't like you. Ultimately, you can either get used to this reaction or stop being a jerk, but no one is violating your rights.

Not with sjw and pronoun nazis.

They want a fight, they are going to get one.

That's the vibe I'm getting.

 

[sun rise]

Not with sjw and pronoun nazis.

They want a fight, they are going to get one.

That's the vibe I'm getting.

We also have the right wing cancel culture which appears in the news every time someone does something or says something they don't like.

 

[sun rise]

In many areas including speech, there's something equally important although often not expressed.

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

unless that speech imposes a significant risk of imminent harm, or falls into a few other rare exceptions.

This is the most important bit though.
This is what ought to be communicated and spread more via social media. Preferably, in a more specified way obviously.

Humbly
Hermit

 

[Father Heathen]

Not with sjw and pronoun nazis.

They want a fight, they are going to get one.

That's the vibe I'm getting.

They're not the government. Just a loud but tiny, irrelevant fringe.

 

[Twilight Hue]

They're not the government. Just a loud but tiny, irrelevant fringe.

Not when laws are being passed that makes criminalization out of words.

It's clear there are already people in government willing to sign off on the criminalization of speech and subsequently enforcing it with penalties.

 

[Father Heathen]

The conservatives who cry about freedom of speech when private businesses ban those who've violated the user policy agreement are the same ones who cry about flag burning, anthem kneeling, blasphemous art, etc.

 

[Father Heathen]

Not when laws are being passed that makes criminalization out of words.

Any particular examples?

 

[exchemist]

Not when laws are being passed that makes criminalization out of words.

It's clear there are people in government willing to sign off on the criminalization of speech.

Examples? What words are these?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Any particular examples?

I would say pronouns are a good start.

Senate bill 219 which is now passed into law.

Jail Time for Using the Wrong Pronoun

 

[Twilight Hue]

Examples? What words are these?

Refer to 13.

I hope this is not just another, I'm playing dumb stichk here.

The issues with word usage has been big news for awhile now.

 

[Twilight Hue]

The conservatives who cry about freedom of speech when private businesses ban those who've violated the user policy agreement are the same ones who cry about flag burning, anthem kneeling, blasphemous art, etc.

I would certainly decry things like that, but I wouldn't prescribe nor support jail time or other legal penalties for people doing so using the justice system as a weapon.

 

[Father Heathen]

I would say pronouns are a good start.

Senate bill 219 which is now passed into law.

Jail Time for Using the Wrong Pronoun

PolitiFact - Claims mislead about California forcing jail time for using wrong transgender pronoun

 

[Heyo]

I came across this article by Ben Shapiro (I know...) entitled "America's silent majority must fight liberals killing freedom of speech." Granted, it's Ben Shapiro so he may be intentionally misleading people since I'm sure he's aware of basic Constitutional law, but he exploits a common misconception in this piece.

In fact, the right to freedom of speech in the US, granted by the First Amendment, prohibits the government from imposing penalties on most forms of speech, whether political, religious, or otherwise. The government, and the government alone, cannot fine, jail, deny services, discriminate against, or otherwise punish people in the US for expressing their viewpoint unless that speech imposes a significant risk of imminent harm, or falls into a few other rare exceptions.

Unlike what that article suggests:

1. People not liking you because they think you're a horrible person based on what you've said, does not violate your freedom of speech.
2. Your boss warning you not to say offensive things because it will hurt the company's reputation does not violate your freedom of speech.
3. People boycotting you because they think you're horrible and don't want to give you their money does not violate your freedom of speech.
4. People disagreeing with you and saying critical things about your opinions, beliefs, or behavior does not violate your freedom of speech.
5. Corporations canceling your account or pulling your ads has nothing to do with your right of freedom of speech. If anything, the corporation's freedom of speech allows it to regulate the content of its platform and associations, free of government interference.

Please take a moment to understand this, if you weren't aware.

The old adage goes, "When you've been living with privilege, equality feels like oppression." A lot of US conservatives are coming to realize that they've effectively lost the culture war. A growing US majority no longer agrees with their views, and in fact finds their views immoral and harmful. This may be jarring to someone who is used to getting their way and having society agree with them, but this phenomenon is entirely unrelated to the right of freedom of speech.

There is no legally actionable harm. There is no redress owed to you. It's just that lots of people think you're a jerk and don't like you. Ultimately, you can either get used to this reaction or stop being a jerk, but no one is violating your rights.

Slightly on a tangent but still on topic: in Germany the Bundesverfassungsgericht (supreme court) has recently ruled that customers of online platforms (like FaceBook) have a right to be informed if a post was deleted (after the fact) and they have a right to be heard before an account gets cancelled.

 

[Nakosis]

There is no legally actionable harm. There is no redress owed to you. It's just that lots of people think you're a jerk and don't like you. Ultimately, you can either get used to this reaction or stop being a jerk, but no one is violating your rights.

The problem is being labeled a jerk or other derogatory label.

I remember in elementary school, there was one girl who everyone picked on. She stupid, uneducated, nasty, smelly. Everyone knew this, accepted it as fact. Nobody would sit next to her, the only time anyone talked to her was to taunt her and let her know what an unwanted soul she was.
I remember how easy it was to manipulate crowd into bullying the person who was a little different, are they didn't really have to be that different You just needed to take a disliking to them.

I was relatively new to the area. Hadn't fully bought into the deplorable reputation she had with everyone. So one day we found ourselves walking down the same road. Started a conversation with her and found out she was a really nice person. It said she had refused the advances of one of the popular boys, and it seems he started a bunch of rumors about her, and being popular, no one was willing to side against him. This had been going on a couple of years. Anyway someone saw me walking an talking with her. So I got targeted a bit, willing to hang out with someone as deplorable as she.

When the popular crowd targets you like that, I don't suppose there is much you can do about it. Certainly complaining about it only makes it worse. Doesn't mean the right thing to do is to join in on the bullying just so you can be accepted by the popular crowd either. I feel a little sad by how easily folks get led around like cattle, being afraid to interact with people the herd has decided has to be avoided.

 

[exchemist]

I would say pronouns are a good start.

Senate bill 219 which is now passed into law.

Jail Time for Using the Wrong Pronoun

This applies only to people in long term care who are wilfully and repeatedly called by the wrong pronoun after having made it clear how they would like to be addressed. Furthermore, there would only ever be a custodial sentence for totally egregious and scandalously discriminatory behaviour.

Nobody is going to go to jail for using the wrong pronoun unless they mount some sort of vendetta against someone in their care - something for which they should be fired from their job in any case.

This is a non-story, whipped up to fool hyperventilating idiots on the Right.

 

[exchemist]

Refer to 13.

I hope this is not just another, I'm playing dumb stichk here.

The issues with word usage has been big news for awhile now.

Maybe, but "issues with word usage" does not constitute infringement of free speech. That's the point of this thread.