Matt Taibbi

Rank 23 of 47
|
Score 29
8/25/2025, 4:55:26 PM
X
In reply to:
Flagged Again by X
@FlaggedByX
·
168d
@therealBSuther @mtaibbi That looks like the pertinent precedent, but the invention of "hate speech" laws has muddied the legal waters. The Trump administration will argue that flag-burning is itself an act of violence against a class of people who revere it.
BSutherland
@therealBSuther
·
168d
@FlaggedByX @mtaibbi Maybe read Brandenburg v Ohio.
Flagged Again by X
@FlaggedByX
·
168d
@mtaibbi I think the idea is that flag-burning is incitement to riot. It might be, and it might not be, depending on the circumstances, but you have to prove it's never incitement to riot in order to call it "stupid".
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
168d
Listen to what you’re saying: you’re criticizing another culture for severely punishing speech, then saying we should do the same thing because everyone else does…
Pingu
@LinuxThePingu
·
168d
@mtaibbi Why Matt??? In any other countries in the world you would go to jail for burning their flags. So why are we tolerating it?? I said good! about time!! Also prosecute those who burn the Bible! Imagine burning a Quran, they will beheaded you on the spot!

The conversation involves a debate on the legality and morality of flag-burning, touching on free speech and legal precedents. The initial statement challenges the interpretation of flag-burning as incitement to violence, suggesting a misunderstanding of the argument. The tone is corrective and aims to clarify the legal argument being made.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and seeks to clarify a misunderstanding, aligning with the principle of doing no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    By attempting to clarify a legal argument, the statement promotes understanding and constructive dialogue. [+1]
  3. 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 constructive criticism without personal attacks, adhering to respectful discourse. [+1]
  4. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds free speech by engaging in a discussion about legal interpretations and precedents. [+1]