Sentences with phrase «not about free speech»

This is not about free speech, but about propriety.

It is equally not about free speech or press freedom because as my view is that no rational human being can justify what they said because it has nothing to with free speech and press freedom.

The debate over the Cecil Rhodes statue in Oxford University is not about free speech, it's about who we want to celebrate.

You see, this is NOT about free speech.

Not exact matches

Although Thiel implies in his essay that the Gawker story about Hogan's sex tape would not have been published by any right - thinking journalistic outlet, and that the First Amendment doesn't and shouldn't protect such behavior, two higher - court judges ruled before the Hogan decision that the Gawker piece was clearly covered by the Constitution's free - speech protections.

His ban from visiting Britain in June 2009 has made him the «poster child» for free speech, not only for Americans concerned about the cultural shift towards totalitarianism and their rights to freedom of expression, but for people around the globe.

So many people who advocate or speak publicly for political or personal reasons aren't acknowledged as much when it comes to religion when someone is wanting to speak out about there faith a light bulb goes off and says we don't want to hear, or talk, or, air any thing that has to do with the mentioning of God but because of the high profile story and because this is the President of the United States it's ok hats off to them for not being ashamed to speak about there faith I agree with Richard some people just because they profess there faith doesn't mean there trying to push there beliefs on anyone people of faith have a right to free speech also.

While I do support free speech, I can't deny my in ability to sort all this out from where I happen to be, dissociated from the major «players» having direct involvement with the situation at hand (which has gone way beyond what I thought this thread would be about, initially).

If its the comments upsetting you then, like it or not, this is what free speech is about.

How about human rights, free speech??? Where is the US government, why don't they raise the issue with the Pakistani government?

The right to offend is what free speech looks like in practice, and the whole point about free speech is you don't pick who gets to enjoy it.

After raising in a light way some deep questions about equality, democracy, and free speech, he concludes: «The ultimate failure of the United States will probably not derive from the problems we see or the conflicts we wage.

And we all know that free speech doesn't mean we can speak and write lies about others (this is how you get sued).

This is about children and gender equality, not about limiting free speech.»

Consensus or not, most of the proposed ban's pushback has come from concerns about free speech, that holiest of cows in the Western world.

In a statement, Broglio's office said: «Archbishop Broglio and the Archdiocese stand firm in the belief, based on legal precedent, that such a directive from the Army (about not reading the letter) constituted a violation of his Constitutionally - protected right of free speech and the free exercise of religion, as well as those same rights of all military chaplains and their congregants.»

«While it may not be a violation of the law - it may be an act of free speech - it certainly violates our sense of decency,» she added about the Florida event.

We live in a country a free speech and freedom of religon, how about we all start practicing it and not persecute or belittle someone for what they believe and how they practice it.

But giving your mom a speech about how you are morally superior to her for not eating animals is false logic, considering the slave labor used to produce your fruits, vegetables, nuts, and other delicious animal - free ingredients (coffee, sugar, bananas, mangos, berries, peaches, and cashews are just a few examples of foods imported from the third world where workers are severely mistreated and underpaid, or farmed by underpaid Mexican immigrants in the US).

A Downing Street spokeswoman refused to comment, but a Home Office source told The Times: «Getting agreement about the thresholds for what constitutes extremism and what needs to be protected as free speech is not going to be easy or straightforward.»

Quinn said the bill was not meant to stifle free speech but make sure the centers are being honest about what they do.

He quoted the president as emphasising that without free speech, elected representatives would not be able to gauge public feelings and moods about governance issues.

The «free speech zone» is also about 10 - 15 feet lower than the boardwalk, ensuring that the Mayor and other speakers could not see the «free speech zone», much less the signs.

Lord Leveson, who appeared more irritated with Mr Gove than he has with any witness during the inquiry, replied: «Mr Gove I don't need to be told about the importance of free speech - I really don't.

The accusations against Paladino in the Buffalo School Board's petition do not include his remarks about the Obamas, but the Buffalo businessman has brought them up in his defense for allegedly leaking the teacher negotiation details, saying it's part of a conspiracy to deny him his first amendment rights for free speech under the US Constitution.

The accusations against Paladino in the Buffalo School Board's petition do not include his remarks about the Obamas, but the Buffalo businessman has brought them up in his defense for allegedly leaking the teacher negotiation details, saying it's part of a conspiracy to deny him his first amendment rights fo free speech under the US Constitution.

Whether we're talking about free speech on Usenet, the policy questions of legitimate marketing and com - mercial activity conducted over email, or the desirable but spam - ish mes - sages that trip the filters and disappear, there is always friction not around the most egregious case (no one argues for Leo Kuvayev's «\ / 1@gR / - \» messages) but at the blurry places where spam threatens to blend into acceptable use, and fighting one might have a deleterious effect on the other.

While this freedom is an enormous advantage for writers, and can be used to create a lot of good (think free speech, and enabling people to react to biased sources etc.), there are undoubtedly people who may not think twice about being «ethical journalists», mostly cause, well, for the most part blog authors not journalists.

2018-04-08 17:38 I keep hearing about a supposed «hate speech» exception to the First Amendment, or statements such as, «This isn't free speech, it's hate speech Online customer service site.

I keep hearing about a supposed «hate speech» exception to the First Amendment, or statements such as, «This isn't free speech, it's hate speech Online customer service site.

This led to an investigation which confirmed the buy and resulted in various firings, not to mention sparking a multitude of questions about free speech.

Higher education today gives analysts, policymakers, and critics so much to fret about — cost, free speech, leftward lurching faculty, politically trendy majors — that we haven't been paying nearly enough heed to the quality and value of the product itself.

Because now readers are demanding more and more low - priced and free e-books, and don't even feel guilty about it because they feel that publishers tried to take advantage of them with overpriced e-books, delayed releases, poor formatting, blocking lending, blocking text - to - speech, and invasive DRM.

As a customer, you are undoubtedly concerned about the quality of speech writing services, which are not free.

you don't have to stop commenting if you don't want if you want to comment about something comment feel free OH YEA FREEDOM OF SPEECH So don't stop commenting cause of other people, you can comment any time you want don't listen to the others who told you stop you are a nice person and I don't want you to feel upset neither does impa we want you to feel good coming here not hated Thanks for reading

I do nt see an easy way around this because once you make an exception and limit legally what the Koch brothers say its the thin end of the wedge, and soon free speech will be illegal for things you and I want to speak about.

JimD FYI the very serious problem with Benghazi is the known false cover story (BTW I know a lot about the specific details of this event) not so bad except for the poor wannabe movie maker they arrested to cover their lie free speech... once a liberal value I am a «denier» because of my best evaluation of the evidence not because I'm «scared» of a carbon tax not because I don't like Obama

Is it not disturbing (as I point out in installment 4), that rather than leading the free - speech charge, cultural icons such as Margaret Atwood and David Suzuki seem utterly laissez - faire about liberty?

With this latest report, environmental activists and their state AG allies will have a tougher time arguing that their campaign is not about suppressing free speech.

With a cabal of attorneys general gathering information about Exxon and its withholding of information that it had about the risks of climate change, some, not Eli to be sure, but some who the bunnies would not be surprised to have identified, are seeking to frame the matter as an issue of free speech.

Yet, this is not a case about free speech writ large, nor about the guaranty of a fair trial, nor about any cognizable constitutional right of public access to the courts.

It would not be feasible (or consistent with free speech values) to give people the right to force newspapers — or, say, gossip blogs — to erase non-defamatory content about themselves, simply because it paints them in a less - than - positive light..

I don't know about the UK, but I do know that they have fewer protections of free speech than in the US.

Adult - entertainment law is not just about obscenity and free speech, but also about zoning, labor law, record - keeping and who knows what else.

It is not merely coincident with the start of the Supreme Court term that lots of people seem to be talking about free speech.

I don't know where the parameters of free speech should be, I just know that we need to recognize that vital though it is, other values (equality, in particular, as well as people's entitlement not to be lied about and maligned with impunity) are also.

To be concerned about «legal action» means that your speech is not free but if speech is free then to worry about ridicule or ostracization is to reject personal accountability for your words and makes you a coward.

, legislative facts and law (the WHO website shows that drinking water is not safe in that country, so little Jethro won't be moving overseas with dad any time soon), or less crucially about everyday society, like contextual facts and definitions — such as how free speech is jealously protected, how children can't really be blamed for being born out of wedlock, or how married women are natural bartenders.

L. Rev. 303) succinctly characterizes defamation as an unprivileged accusation (regrettably, the article is not available for free in the wild)-- the article goes into detail about the nature of speech acts and the difference between accusing and reporting.

In an actively free - speech regime, «more speech» is a response, and was used in the past to ensure one wasn't being lied about.