Sentences with phrase «n't free speech»

People who express them are spreading lies and propaganda — which isn't free speech at all.

Ain't free speech grand?

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.

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.

Bribes are not free speech.

Lucy, all free speech is ok but, atatcking his business is not free speech it is an agressive, violent act....

The state or local government displaying a scene from someone's holy book is NOT free speech, it is explicitly prohibited by the constitution as an «endorsement of a religion».

That is not free speech, but plain Stereotyping and the victim in this case just happened to be a muslim pundit that he stumbled upon.

And yet regardless of the protestors» other sympathies, and some of the weaknesses of their arguments, this is simply not a free speech issue, no matter how often their enemies try to pretend it is.

The purpose is to amend the US Constitution to clarify that corporations are subservient to the people and money is not free speech.

I am all for the free speech but slanderous statements and character assassination are not a free speech but another act of victimization against the ones who are unable to defend themselves.

I would say not — because it's not free speech, it's audi alteram partem that is at issue here.

Not exact matches

A free market guy wouldn't favour a cap on cellphone roaming fees, as hinted in the speech from the throne.

Of course, the social network is a corporation controlled by its shareholders (primarily Mark Zuckerberg), and therefore it isn't required to adhere to the free - speech dictates of the First Amendment.

That's not what «free speech» implies.

One user from California noted,» [It's] not cool to sue customers simply for writing a review,» while another from Massachusetts said, «When you sue your customers for voicing their dissatisfaction in a public setting, you're attempting to stifle free speech.»

An employee does not have free reign [sic] to engage in political speech that disrupts the workplace, but punishing an employee for deviating from company orthodoxy on a political issue is not allowed either.

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.

It's not a question of safety or of free speech.

To block very hurtful comments that do not use hate speech (something like «why don't you step in front of a truck») could be perceived as limiting free speech.

«I'm tried of giving them this free [free speech] waiver over what is happening... The platforms are not built with human users in mind.»

Fuchs said UF is dedicated to free speech and public discourse, but that the First Amendment does not require risk of imminent violence to students.

«Free speech is not as free as all that in the real world, where there are numerous social repercussions for behaving in a rude, obscene and appalling manner,» she wriFree speech is not as free as all that in the real world, where there are numerous social repercussions for behaving in a rude, obscene and appalling manner,» she wrifree as all that in the real world, where there are numerous social repercussions for behaving in a rude, obscene and appalling manner,» she writes.

While it speaks volumes that many Americans value their right to free speech, this does not mean that we have to pay for their vitriol.

The tabloid is fighting for an important free speech principle and is pointing out, correctly, that celebrities like Hogan should not be able to use the media when it suits them and shut it down when it doesn't.

The app centers around a colorful feed, which Reddy also says has a combination of AI (natural language processing also analyzes every post) and human moderation to make sure that users retain their free speech but don't engage in targeted harassment and other negativity.

«We think Section 230 is vitally important to free speech online and should not be changed,» Electronic Frontier Foundation media relations director Rebecca Jeschke wrote in an email.

I can not afford the time to consider whether to write an article for some blog or not, whether to do a free speech or not or whether to accept a dinner invitation or not.

Facebook, which got the case moved to San Francisco from Illinois, argued the users hadn't suffered a concrete injury such as physical harm, loss of money or property; or a denial of their right to free speech or religion.

It wasn't until I asked him if he'd heard of free speech that the tone changed.

«When you have freedom of speech and freedom of expression and don't get thrown in jail by criticizing a bad idea, it's more likely bad ideas will get exposed, and it's not a coincidence oppressive regimes are also oppressive in clamping down on free speech.»

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.

Facebook doesn't like to decide what kind of rhetoric is appropriate or inappropriate for fear of encroaching on its users» free speech rights.

But the two leaders did not take questions from reporters, a win for Xi, who oversees an authoritarian system that has sought to sharply limit free speech and press freedoms.

I don't think anyone would claim that specific groups can't have their own Facebook - like web site, but this particular site is perpetuating a gender segregation philosophy / ideology that many find abhorrent and readily use their free speech rights to argue against.

I mentioned the ninth amendment for one reason, one can not use ones free speech to disparage the right of free religion of another.

You are probably for free speech as long as the questions that are asked don't make you uncomfortable?

Free speech issues and portrayals of Islam needlessly stirred a hornet's nest recently when «South Park» depicted the Prophet Mohammed disguised in a bear suit in the 200th episode of the popular Comedy Central TV show.

This will not resolve today's complex questions of free speech, community standards, and government subsidies.

Laycock's hypothesis ripened into full - blown suspicion by June 2000 when Justice Stevens took the position that the free speech rights of the Boy Scouts were not violated by a state law requiring them to employ an avowed homosexual as an assistant scoutmaster.

Everyone has free speech, mistaken or not.

Just like with Phil Robertson, matt has the right to free speech, but not freedom from consequences or people showing him the door

«Unfortunately, this new action can not be seen as anything other than an attempt to muzzle the church and subject our right of free speech to government review and regulation,» he added.

And isn't it ironic that people who want to destroy free speech and association are the ones who pretend to be free speech's most ardent supporters?

free speech does not include SLANDER.

> 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.

When the U.S. Muslim community sounds out LOUD and CLEAR, without equivocation, and immediately against all forms of terrorism, including all aggressive religious intolerance for human rights, women's right, children, equal protection under the law, the respect for other religions to coexist, the right to free speech, and the ability to separate church from state, IF THEY FINALLY DO THAT AND LOUDLY, then we will begin to feel comfortable that they are truly embracing American ideals and here to join us, not to oppose, defy, or undermine what we hold dear.

I know this is very hard for theists to accept, but free speech isn't just for those who agree with you.

Just look at the visitors to this site that think they will be preaching to the choir only to find free speech is at work, not «fellowship»... some are shocked and try to tell those who don't believe that they have no business here.

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.