A wet fish slap across the face of a Freudian slip!

[reACTIONary]

29. As a one of those "idiotic free speach" extremists ....

.... that paleotn seems to think is a threat to life and limb, I can assure you I think everything is fine on DU. But what standard is paleotn advocating? Presumably much less tolerant of others than what is allowed for now.

Why should someone who has "power and influence" be legally prohibited from saying anything that anyone else is allowed to say? And if such a person actually does have more "power and influence" than others, what practical means might exist for outlawing his speech rather than ours? In actual fact, it is those who are influential and powerful who would be deciding who can speak and what can be said - as a means of oppression to increase their power and influence. THEY wouldn't be the ones suffering.

As an example, consider our right to desecrate and burn an American flag in public as a protest. This is considered by many (quite possibly a majority) to be an incitement to violence that requires retaliation both immediate and legal. And, having burned an American flag, I can tell you that it is provocative - that's one of the reasons for doing it. BUT, even so, it is my RIGHT as an American to burn an American flag. Would you take that right from me?

Don't kid yourself, eroding first amendment rights won't work in our favor or help protect minorities and the oppressed. Quite the opposite. Loosening up those standards would be used as a pretext to shutdown sites like DU. I doubt it would be used against those who are opposed to us.