Actions not words

  Heard on the news that Twitter is suspending its' policy on Covid misinformation. Apparently, it was put into place to "protect" the people. I'm thinking the real deal is an attack on Elon Musk. The liberals want to make him appear dangerous. That's part of the playbook to gain control once again of Twitter and other liberal platforms. Suspending peoples accounts because they are expressing their opinion is certainly a restriction of free speech. Even when it is supposed to be for the "protection" of the people the question remains, just who decides upon the truth? And that is at the heart of freedom of speech. The ability to speak my truth is that right! You don't have to agree, you are free to present as much contradictory evidence as you like. You are not free to silence me. I recall in the not too distant past when the supreme court issued their opinion on flag burning. In the courts opinion that is an expression of free speech and must be allowed. I disagree with that opinion but cannot attack those that burn the flag. I have to stand by voicing my opposition but doing nothing more. That's the way free speech works. I can and will continue to voice my opinion on that in the hopes the court, or the Congress changes that opinion and codifies flag burning as a federal offense. That's what I want to happen. It's for the protection of the people.

 Now there are laws regarding hate speech. That's a limitation on free speech, isn't it? This is one definition of hate speech. "Speech that is intended to offend, insult, intimidate, or threaten an individual or group based on a trait or attribute, such as sexual orientation, religion, color, gender or disability." I'd say that about covers anything of a negative nature you may want to say. The court has decided it is a crime to say anything negative. If you read a few of the cases regarding this the reasoning is often arbitrary and confusing. A whole lot of double talk going on in the courtroom. Intent is assumed, all you have to do is say anything within the confines of "hate" or negativity reflecting upon another person or group of people. In brief, if you ain't lovin', you are hatin'. 

 You can hate all you want; you just can't say so. How can anyone, especially a court of law based on blind justice, determine your intent? Well, you know what they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Apparently, the courts have decided all negative comments are intended to offend, insult, intimidate, or threaten. Sounds like some of my grade school teachers didn't like me much. My parents must not have either, or my drill instructors in the Navy. Strange, I was told it was for my own good. 

 The thing is, I was free to say whatever I wanted in return. I could, as long as I was willing to accept the consequences of those words. And that is another part of freedom not to be taken for granted. Freedom comes with a responsibility. You will be held accountable for your actions. You are not restricted in saying or doing what you want to do but are accountable for your actions. This idea that I can be held to account for merely speaking is a violation of that freedom. It's a restriction. The issue is that nothing has to actually happen in order for you to be charged with a crime. All you have to do is voice your opinion! Your opinion is a crime? My opinion may precipitate some criminal activity on others part, beating me up or whatever, but my opinion shouldn't be the crime. That's like blaming the water because you got wet.

 Speech is what we think. When we attempt to restrict thought, to codify that process, that is the path to despotism. When we are forced to think and say only what is allowed by the powers that be or be punished how can it be otherwise. It is the free expression of our thoughts, our ideas that stir men to action. Granted those actions may be positive or negative regardless of the original intent, but it is the action that we should be held to account for, not the thought. 

        "WHEN in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.  "Respect to the Opinions of Mankind" My opinion is not a crime. I'm entitled to that by virtue of being a member of mankind! And yes, when those men signed that document, that declaration of their opinion, they did risk death! The King had no right to tell them they couldn't say whatever they liked. We fought a war to prove that, and we won that war. Speeches and declarations never won any wars! It was the actions of men that won the war.