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

[Shadow Wolf]

No. There is no agreement. I never agreed. I just signed up and accepted the dictates if I want to play ball here.

That's not agreeing because it's a strictly one sided arrangement.

I'd rather term it as as an acknowledgement. Likened to an arranged marriage. Only one is in charge. ;0]

You're saying there was no agreement, that you never agreed, yet at least twice you HAD to agree to the rules to make an account. Signing up means you agree to the terms. Which includes, as you know, consequences for violating the rules. You agreed to that, and it's not like this website can be argued to be a need or vitally important in one's life.

 

[Twilight Hue]

You're saying there was no agreement, that you never agreed, yet at least twice you HAD to agree to the rules to make an account. Signing up means you agree to the terms. Which includes, as you know, consequences for violating the rules. You agreed to that, and it's not like this website can be argued to be a need or vitally important in one's life.

No. An agreement is sitting down at a table and working out terms between two people or parties. You sign in the end.

What you have here is an acknowledgement of terms. There is no agreement. Just an acknowledgement that remains one sided.

There's a difference.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

No. An agreement is sitting down at a table and working out terms between two people or parties. You sign in the end.

What you have here is an acknowledgement of terms. There is no agreement. Just an acknowledgement that remains one sided.

There's a difference.

No, you click that you agree to the terms. You didn't acknowledge you recieved them, you acknowledged that you reviewed them amd agree to those terms.

 

[Twilight Hue]

No, you click that you agree to the terms. You didn't acknowledge you recieved them, you acknowledged that you reviewed them amd agree to those terms.

Call it what you want, but it's not an agreement.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Call it what you want, but it's not an agreement.

Take it up with a judge. It won't go your way. It never does in these things for users because the user did agree to those terms. These things have legal standings. Legally it is an agreement, no matter what else you are trying to call it.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Clearly that can't be the only reason.
They have been complaining about "liberals" and "communism" for the full length of the Trump administration as well.

And they were right. Because now that's where we are headed.

 

[Kooky]

And they were right. Because now that's where we are headed.

Where are you headed?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Take it up with a judge. It won't go your way. It never does in these things for users because the user did agree to those terms. These things have legal standings. Legally it is an agreement, no matter what else you are trying to call it.

Of course. Its an oligarchy.

 

[Father Heathen]

Call it what you want, but it's not an agreement.

They're called user agreements for a reason. Just ask a mod, or let them know that you falsified the form when you signed up.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Of course. Its an oligarchy.

No, it is an agreement, an agreement you apparently have no qualms breaking, andl agreement you made lightly and with the intention of not upholding your end of the agreement.
That reeks of entitlement.

 

[Twilight Hue]

No, it is an agreement, an agreement you apparently have no qualms breaking, andl agreement you made lightly and with the intention of not upholding your end of the agreement.
That reeks of entitlement.

It's one sided. Thats not an agreement. It's only an acknowledgement of the house rules.

I can abide with house rules if I want to play the game, even though I don't agree with it.

Hopefully that makes it more clear.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's one sided.

Then don't agree. Move along. You don't have to use this sight, or any other that requires an agreement to register amd use the sight.
You don't walk into an establishment with this entitlement to not have to follow the rules and breaking agreements, do you?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Then don't agree. Move along. You don't have to use this sight, or any other that requires an agreement to register amd use the sight.
You don't walk into an establishment with this entitlement to not have to follow the rules and breaking agreements, do you?

Well that's for the mods to decide.

Let's just say I have a rap sheet, but I can play ball.

But don't tell me I have to agree because I don't.

That said , I can still follow rules which I try to do and is a reason I'm still here.

I'm not pressing the issue any further. I said my piece good and proper.

You may have the last word.

 

[Heyo]

It's one sided. Thats not an agreement. It's only an acknowledgement of the house rules.

I can abide with house rules if I want to play the game, even though I don't agree with it.

Hopefully that makes it more clear.

The agreement is not that you think those are good rules. You just have to agree to follow them.
Do you agree?

 

[We Never Know]

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.

If anyone wants to test the freedom.of speech, tell a cop to f*** off. See how that goes.

 

[Father Heathen]

It's one sided. Thats not an agreement. It's only an acknowledgement of the house rules.

I can abide with house rules if I want to play the game, even though I don't agree with it.

Hopefully that makes it more clear.

So you didn't agree with but you agree to abide by? That's the only your prattling makes sense.

 

[Twilight Hue]

So you didn't agree with but you agree to abide by? That's the only your prattling makes sense.

If you say so.

 

[Father Heathen]

And they were right. Because now that's where we are headed.

I suppose you consider present day Europe indistinguishable from the Soviet Union?

 

[Father Heathen]

If you say so.

Facts and logic say so.

 

[Wildswanderer]

I suppose you consider present day Europe indistinguishable from the Soviet Union?

The old or new Soviet union?