Matt Taibbi

Rank 34 of 47
|
Score -42
Red River Racontuer
@joshuawells
·
120d
@mtaibbi I don't know why people struggle to understand this, but since 1969, Brandenburg v. Ohio, no person, that I'm aware of, has been punished solely for speech. Calls for violence, overthrow of the government, etc., are all protected by the 1A.

For speech to be punished, you really…
3/20/2025, 7:50:35 PM
X

The statement is part of a broader discussion on free speech and its limits, particularly in the context of incitement to violence. The conversation involves multiple participants debating the legal boundaries of free speech and its implications, which constitutes public discourse.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm but discusses the legal boundaries of speech that could potentially lead to harm, aligning with the principle of striving to do no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in a legal and philosophical discussion without resorting to personal attacks, adhering to the principle of constructive criticism and dialogue. [+1]
  3. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds the principles of free speech by discussing its legal limits and implications, using the platform responsibly to engage in a civic dialogue. [+2]