this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2024
-28 points (23.1% liked)

Conservative

369 readers
4 users here now

A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff

  1. Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.

  2. We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.

  3. Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.

A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] realcaseyrollins@thelemmy.club 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

How many people did that "disinformation" kill? Do first amendment rights end when speech leads to people doing harmful things to themselves?

[โ€“] pixxelkick@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

When they lead to harm, they do indeed end.

People often forget the right to free speech isn't prioritized over other human rights in pretty kych every first world country.

Otherwise stuff like Libel and Slander wouldn't make sense legally. As well as hate speech laws.

Your right to free speech comes after peoples rights to safety from harm, and how that's worded varies country by country, but feel free to Google up on it for your specific case.

It's why stuff like advertising laws, misinformation and disinformation laws, etc can work too.

Free speech isn't right #1, which some people just can't seem to wrap their head around I guess. This isn't even new, it's been like that for ages.

How do you think snake oil salesmen could be prosecuted if they were allowed to just say whatever they want?

Why do you think it's possible to have legal repercussions for threatening to shoot up a school, or bomb a plane?