Serious question: should ALL speech be protected? The obvious answer is, I believe, "no".

[Atticus]

Most of us are familiar with the commonly offered example that one cannot shout "FIRE!" In a crowded theater when there is no fire. While that makes obvious sense, it is not terribly useful in judging other examples of "extreme" speech.

When Trump---who has praised, condoned and encouraged violence as a response to those with whom he disagrees---publishes poor-quality photos of people "suspected" of vandalizing a statue along with a screed about the "seriousness" of the crime--- is that not the equivalent of the "FIRE!" example?

Do we not believe that many in his "poorly educated" base understand that he is signalling for these "suspects"---or those who resemble them---to be "dealt with"?

As they have done with patriotism, religious freedom and the Second Amendment, the Trumpies have perverted freedom of speech into an unrecognizable weapon which they use to bludgeon their opponents

[hlthe2b]

1. NO...

[COLGATE4]

2. All speech isn't protected. There are exceptions, such as:

libel/slander, child pornography, hate speech, incitement to violence to name a few.

[hlthe2b]

10. Yes... I agree. Thats my point.

[Coleman]

11. Hate speech is protected

Can a person be arrested for using the n word?

[COLGATE4]

15. There are laws which criminalize hate speech

[Coleman]

16. Please enlighten me

What are some of the laws that make hate speech illegal, state and federal.

[Sneederbunk]

3. No. Especially that I do not like.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

4. It isn't.

Forms of speech that can be restricted or prohibited include obscenity, fraud, child pornography, speech integral to criminal conduct, speech that incites crime, defamation, speech that violates intellectual property law, threats, and advertising.

[paleotn]

5. The border of the 1st Amendment is clear.....

One's 1st Amendment rights end precisely where they interfere with or impair the rights of anyone else. Things like slander and liable lie well beyond this border and are not protected by free speech. My right to own property, a social media platform perhaps... well, you know the rest.

[janterry]

6. Most speech should be protected

If you are inciting or directing violence, then of course not.

But most speech should be protected.

[sop]

7. Not all forms of speech are the same. Political speech is the most protected form of speech

under the First Amendment. The Supreme Court has decided that political speech warrants the highest level of scrutiny against the laws that regulate it. When it comes to expressing political views, there's little that can be done to limit that form of expression, no matter how over the top.

[Atticus]

8. While I agree that what you've said is accurate, it is just another one of our

long-established "understandings" that fails to protect us from psychopaths like Trump.

[sop]

14. Just because a political figure says something doesn't always make it "political speech."

Most of what Trump puts out is hate speech, incitement to violence and lies that kill people.

[snowybirdie]

9. Freedom of Speech

is protection, mostly from, government actions against it. Speech is not protected from private ramifications from what is said. i. e. A boss can fire someone for something they post on Facebook.

[Dr. Strange]

12. Popehat has a good article on free speech...

including what forms of speech are not protected and some of the bad arguments that are used to try to limit speech.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/08/free-speech-cliches-media-should-stop-using/596506/

[Chainfire]

13. I prefer all of the "free speech" that

can possibly survive. I would rather see haters out in the open where they can be dealt with rather underground. When Nazis march in the street, their faces are on display for the world to see, and that is a good thing.