On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 09:12:24AM +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: >On Wednesday, 24 March 2021 11:38:25 PM AEDT Steve McIntyre wrote: >> Freedom of speech does *not* mean freedom from consequences. > >Here is a good reply to this very statement: > >~~~ >"Freedom of speech is supposed to imply freedom from quite a wide range >of possible consequences; mostly consequences like fines or incarceration, >but the spirit of it applies more broadly than that. If I were to say that >[whoever] is free to speak, but I wouldn’t guarantee there would be no >consequences for that speech, wouldn’t it be fair to interpret my words >as a veiled threat? > >The only valid “consequences” for an act of free speech is a solid rebuttal. > >If you think otherwise, then I suggest that you haven’t quite grasped the >point of the concept, or that you simply have tyrannical tendencies >(as many do). >~~~ > >Taken from the following conversation: > > > https://shadowtolight.wordpress.com/2021/02/07/friendly-atheist-defends-censorhip/
Rather than pick on one sentence of what I wrote and quote random people on the internet as a "rebuttal", how about reading and responding to the rest of that mail too? I'm not talking about fines or incarceration, I'm not talking about "threats", I'm talking about the *effects of the speech* itself here. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. [email protected] You lock the door And throw away the key There's someone in my head but it's not me
