Or should we oppose it?
Here we are presented with a classic false choice, with two extreme positions that we are informed that we 'must' choose between as no other options exist. But other options do exist, in fact there is an enormous amount of room between nothing is forbidden and everything is forbidden!
What makes this even more ridiculous is that free speech, the Liberal ideal that absolutely anything should be said, does not and has never existed. Speech, in all of it's forms, has always had limits put upon it. When I was growing up 'drop dead' was a more extreme version of 'get lost'. When I said that to someone on Facebook a few years ago I got a ban, they said it was encouraging suicide. No matter who you think is in the right, it does demonstrate that there are limits to speech. Just like there has always been.
What this means is that speech requires judgement, because something said in one place or to a particular person may not be suitable in another place or to a different person. Which is common sense. Time and place matter, so does context. What you say at home might not be acceptable in public. In fact nearly everything said in private would be fine.
Conspiracy to commit a crime, is a crime. To be honest I'm happy with it being a crime. I think most people would be. It also shows that there are exceptions to every rule.
What we put up with we get more of.
To Help Support My Work
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditionalist Future
Another Article You Might Like?