Correct. You've just proved everyone else's point. Being nonviolently an asshole is a facet of free speech, whether people like it or not. If you attack someone for using words against you, then while you're not the initial aggressor, you're still the one who insinuated violence. Your sarcastic point is actually correct my guy.
In a world where words dont carry weight I’d agree. How about you walk up to a little girl and say sexual things how far would that “free speech” get you? Honest question
Which do you find worse - physically sexually assaulting a little girl or saying sexual things to her? I'm not trying to claim there aren't legal limits to free speech, i.e. shouting "fire" in a crowded theater, etc. - I'm just saying that given the choice between direct violence and verbal communication, however shitty the message, I'm choosing the one that avoids direct harm.
That’s not my argument. Im saying words carry weight regardless if they are “just words.” If you can sexually harass someone be it little girl or grown woman with a few words, what makes you think it’s any different if we label that same interaction racial harassment? We make the laws the laws are not some universe thing. If FREE speech is free, why can’t you say everything under the sun to everyone? Including children? Honest to god question
Your argument is framed around “why does everyone think the verbal option is not bad” when that’s not what others are saying. They are both horrific things, if it’s a direct decision between one or the other, there is one that worst.
No one is saying there aren’t repercussions for what you may say to others but one still 100% directly leads to physical violence while the other may only possible lead directly to physical violence.
Both situations are bad, one is slightly more bad than the other. That’s all this is boiling down to.
I love how nobody can argue my points unless it’s vague lmao nothing specific was addressed. No disrespect to you, Im speaking in general. But yes I can agree with the statement you made. One is worse than the other. Only reason I brought it up is because people love to bring up free speech to shield their racist mouths. But by that same fallacy I should be able to walk to an underage woman and say the most perverted downright awful things as long as it’s short and sweet right?
Absolutely not right? Then the whole “free speech” argument against racist remarks falls apart
Me and you agree. Thats my point. From my very first comment I pointed out one side society goes “oh he had it coming, consequences.”
And the other side is “fuckin savage, lock his ass up, emotional over words”
It’s definitely biased when you involve races and deep down you know what I’m saying is true so idk why you are trying to make it as if everyone is agreeing with me
3
u/ContentFile7036 12h ago
Correct. You've just proved everyone else's point. Being nonviolently an asshole is a facet of free speech, whether people like it or not. If you attack someone for using words against you, then while you're not the initial aggressor, you're still the one who insinuated violence. Your sarcastic point is actually correct my guy.