YOU FOOLISH PSEUDO JEDI

If I wanted to talk about something suitable for my childrens' ears, I would be talking to them directly.

Sorry to put it so bluntly to you guys but being a parent isn't just a state, it's a belief: that no one in the world is as good as your own kids.

So what side are you in agreement with? The side of, to my understanding, censoring ourselves with children in mind, or that we should be able to speak our mind without that boundary?

I have used the internet from a young age. Kids don't belong on it.

Also we should be able to discuss things without that boundary. Adults don't mingle or have meetings where kids are.

Things were better before the anti free speech generation.

ren wrote: I have used the internet from a young age. Kids don't belong on it.

Also we should be able to discuss things without that boundary. Adults don't mingle or have meetings where kids are.

Things were better before the anti free speech generation.

ABSOLUTELY! This mentality is pervasive! It's everywhere! I've found it at so-cake hard core LHP forums and Discord servers. I've found it in places that actually advertise being centers for free speech. Here... and at FA as well.

There was never any magical barrier that would pop up and wrap our mouths up so we couldn't speak. We just have a lot of communication between people who before would never have known each other existed. So many conflicting views... truly we can not be without pissing SOMEBODY off...and now we have to hear about it.

Presumably we all refer to "free speech" as discussing any idea or concepts, relevant in context, as we see fit as mature and dispassionate philosophers....(perhaps occasionally emphatic for effect)


not necessarily to rehearse the script of Deadwood in our best Pepe accents and then call upon the right to free speech once we are censured for being uncivil and needlessly inflammatory....

That sounds a lot like a kind of free speech, then, that only applies if the content is deemed "morally acceptable" in some archaic context and consequence free sense. Who gets to make that call, though? Why does anyone get to make it? What is the pragmatic benefit of such a condition?

Great questions and examples! I myself will discuss anything...ideas are never taboo with me, only certain practices. It takes a certain amount of development as a person to get there, though, and people who haven't gotten there still get a say...

That sounds a lot like a kind of free speech, then, that only applies if the content is deemed "morally acceptable" in some archaic context and consequence free sense. Who gets to make that call, though? Why does anyone get to make it? What is the pragmatic benefit of such a condition?

if you are responding to me - I do not in any way make comment on the moral acceptableness of any topic - merely the manner in which it is discussed.

I'm more than happy to discuss the benefits of making soup from babies, or why, on occasion, genocide might be the best option - as long as it is done civilly and sensibly.

JamesSand wrote: Presumably we all refer to "free speech" as discussing any idea or concepts, relevant in context, as we see fit as mature and dispassionate philosophers....(perhaps occasionally emphatic for effect)


not necessarily to rehearse the script of Deadwood in our best Pepe accents and then call upon the right to free speech once we are censured for being uncivil and needlessly inflammatory....

Needlessly by the judgment of who? I’m certain the person who exercised their right to speak freely didn’t find their words needless.

See, this is my issue with this whole mess. A person should be free to insult as they wish, just not threaten with criminal action. Honestly! It makes my blood boil to see EVERY forum and Discord, even “LHP” ones, require this asinine standard of behaviour.

I finally bit the bullet and designed my own forum because of this crap. I’ve had enough! I want people to have real freedom, free of easily offended fragile humans having ANY power to shut their free speech down.