Sentences with phrase «free speech too»

Are we taking the right to free speech too far, or is all of this virtually harmless?

The people disagreeing with him have free speech too, that's how it works.

Atheists have free speech too... how come we can not look at Christianity as the insensitive notion, at least atheists are not out to make money with their beliefs.

«Employers have free speech too, but they should be somewhat restrained,» Beck says.

Not exact matches

Too many people in the USA misunderstand the First Amendment's right to free speech.

There have been rumblings, for example, that Germany's hate speech law goes too far in clamping down on free speech.

The country is 95 % muslim (75 % Sunni, 20 % Shia)-- Mohammad wasn't too concerned with free speech.

This site advocates free speech, so I thought, but if one gets too close to heart on truth, then you, and your speech is exiled, and not allowed on the premisses, plainly stated, you are booted out.

Nii, you are too stupid to understand that atheists do not want to persecute anyone — you are free to believe whatever you like - we fully support freedom of speech an religion.

Here in the US, we have the freedom of religion and the right to free speech (though people tend to be persecuted if they step too far away from «political correctness» these days.

They too have a right to free speech.

But darn it, I guess they built that free speech thing in there too... (sigh)

«The verdict in the highly publicized case appeared to satisfy no one, with the artistic community seeing it as an infringement on free speech, and Russian Orthodox believers, who had hoped for a prison sentence, saying the fines were too lenient,» the Moscow Times wrote July 13.

They too have the right to free speech, the right to protest, the right to organize, and the right to affect change.

I think it just speaks for itself, when some random assortment of leaders offer a bounty to murder anyone who exercises free speech that contends with the word of the murderer muhamed, they too should be murdered.

I too believe in free speech and Obama should've just laughed this one off.

Still, too many people are confused about what «free speech» actually means.

During his victory speech he said: «We can never be free in Brent until South Africa is free too.»

«That's much too wrong and shouldn't be displayed», even in the land of free speech, carries some weight.

Elia responded Thursday in a letter to the governor that she too supported the students who exercised their free speech rights, and that her agency will investigate «any reports where the safety of students was put in jeopardy, as we always do.»

The high court's conservative majority appeared concerned that the restrictions may be too broad and silence free - speech rights of businesses.

In her acceptance speech, Nixon, 52, voiced the view of her nearly 200 backers who gathered in the ballroom at the basement of the Albany Hilton: Cuomo's move to the left on free college tuition, minimum wage and other policies was too little, too late.

The simple answer is the explanation - all too often incorrectly attributed to Voltaire - of what encapsulates free speech: While I may not agree with what you say, I will defend to the death your right to say it.

The key section of his speech was these words: «Just as those who supported the dogma of big government were proved wrong, so, too, those who argue for the dogma of unbridled free - market forces have been proved wrong again.»

His comments come ahead of a speech that he will make on Thursday in which he will criticise the «ideology» of Tory education policy which, he will argue, mean free schools have too much freedom.

As Wilmshurst and Singh have demonstrated in their own costly and exhausting libel battles, all too often the fight for free speech depends on the courage of individuals.

As the tension escalates, there are some poking between the ribs questions too about free speech and facts in the post-truth era.

Too many children don't fully learn what it means to have the constitutional right of free speech — which means that they also don't learn how to communicate with a peer when they are offended by what she says.

The plaintiffs will essentially be asking the court to overturn a 1977 ruling in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, in part by arguing that unions have gone too far in recent years allowing their collective bargaining efforts to become intertwined with political activism, which then violates the plaintiffs rights to free speech by forcing them to fund political actions they are often opposed to.

The Google store for now is carrying the Ivona speech engine and voices for free in beta form — let's hope that the final versions aren't too costly.

For some, for too many, for the old me, in this great nation of ours — this grand experiment in the land of opportunity and free speech, of where every person's opinion counts, of whiners and information overload — it seems hard to be happy.

PewDiePie's use of the n - word and Campo Santo's response has triggered a massive wave of debate as some worry whether Campo Santo's filing of a DMCA takedown notice was perhaps a step too far, while others have expressed worry that PewDiePie's negative behavior will affect the YouTube platform as a whole, and still others have even defended PewDiePie in a misguided defense of free speech.

We won't censor content so long as this space is used constructively» - and with a pun on «free speech» as the blog name, too.

That «chill» is not just an incoming ice age but the chill of free speech and vigorous debate, too.

The last I heard, the first ammendment gives us all the right of free speech (you have it too).

Profits from the book go to prop up my end of the forthcoming trial, which will be highly consequential for free speech in the United States - but, if that sounds too heavy, Josh's cartoons are a lark and well worth the price of admission.

The IRS denial, in short, hinges on the applicant's activities looking too much like a for - profit trade or business and also the following not qualifying as «charitable» --(1) preserving the fundamental human rights set forth in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (b / c it is a declaration, not a treaty or law) and (2) safeguarding free speech in foreign countries (as the US Constitution's guarantee of free speech does not apply to residents or citizens of foreign countries).

Or is this too much of an imposition on free speech?

Far too often, I hear voices calling for genocide against members of certain faiths and regions of the planet without the corresponding denunciations to be satisfied that speech can be as free as it ought to be.

In the meantime, legislators are reacting to the case and scrambling to pass anti-cyberbullying laws, laws that free speech advocates argue are too broad.

In fact, Facebook has already noted that it is «allowing too much... free speech in countries that haven't experienced it before».

For a company dedicated to the open flow of information, expressing concern about too much free speech is counter-intuitive and problematic.

The use of real names was a free speech issue in the end too, In is interesting to note that FB censors what it considers inappropriate by it's standards, Western world standards but they don't do so with what might be inappropriate in other cultures.

How much free speech is too much?

Too often, protections for free speech and innovation are seemingly forgotten as soon as someone cries «infringement.»