this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2023
42 points (68.8% liked)

Canada

7083 readers
198 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Regions


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social & Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Don't be dense, read the article. The story is not about legality or free speech absolutism. It is about how the window of acceptable political speech in what is considered mainstream has narrowed to a stifling degree to exclude very reasonable milquetoast peacenik sentiments.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

the story is not about legality

Then it shouldn't use the words "free speech" in the headline. Free speech is very much a legal term.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

So is theft and murder and inheritance. We use legal terms in regular parlance all the time.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Ok, and? Regular parlance can be about legal implications too, I've never heard the words "free speech" used in a context with no connection to their legal meaning. Do you have a counter example?

[–] [email protected] -3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I’ve never heard the words “free speech” used in a context with no connection to their legal meaning. Do you have a counter example?

Yes. The very article in this post.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

You ever heard of a circular argument?