You are the only one talking about Nazis and Porn. Your argument reeks of strawman, attacking the concept for something it isn’t even.
You know who it does protect? Minorities, freedom fighters, people trying to get in and out of bad situations with fascist governments and restrictions on what they can say and who they can speak out against.
People like you, you specifically, you are exactly the problem.
Your comment is so mired in ignorance, to think you would oppose free speech over how it would be abused and ignore the net positive is exactly how we’re losing freedoms each and every day.
People like you are ruining the world while telling people you’re fixing it.
Who the fuck said anything about porn of any kind? People always use protecting kids as a way to censor the Internet and it’s almost always in bad faith.
Honestly at this point I want to host a distributed Lemmy instance and completely ignore all country laws in favor of complete and absolute freedom of speech.
It might sound extreme, but pretty sure at this point I’d be willing to die for it given the state of global politics.
This is the beginning of the end of this war
Why you would do this?
Yes, I have hear this much
I did. We were talking about freedom of speech, so opinions and beliefs are about the only things people really disagree about to the point of violence with regards to speech.
I say PSQL as Pee Sequel
Insane take. We don’t have the right to physical violence just for a difference of opinion.
Honestly what I’m saying shouldn’t be a hot take. Freedom of speech has long been a classical liberal position.
Freedom of speech for absolutely everyone, especially people I disagree with and that disagree with me
Gross question. I get what you’re asking, but some of us never get better or even good enough to ‘deserve’ a partner. It’s still our right to pursue love and companionship.
What do we need to get this to %100?
Turns out it’s mankind
This has always been the case.
Where we’re going we don’t need facts
Exactly, kind of. Religious fundamentalism is a fascinating concept, because basically it is exactly that - taking the fundamental ideas of the religion and using that interpretation to derive perspective and subsequent law or policy.
In a very real, significant way it’s a better representation of the religion than the watered down, culturally accepted version that moderate religious individuals will say is the ‘real’ version.
Orthodox is fundamentalism, and anything otherwise is not the actual religion, even if that is the majority, like modern Christianity.
Am I the only one worried about it scratching my eyes???
And I’ve watched the things you’re talking about be used to propose legislation against free speech, and the path you want to take is more slippery than the slipperiest slope imaginable.
Censorship gains traction under the guise of reasonable sounding proposals and always leads to misuse. I have no doubt you have good intentions at heart, but I super promise other people don’t and they will use any legislation available as a way to curtail dissent, treason, and sedition.
I promise we’re better off with havens for free speech.