And you are here why?

In the wake of the Mozilla-Eich craziness , it is really worth re-examining what exactly we mean by "Free Speech". I know, its there in the constitution Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Crystal clear, innit? To absolutely no-ones surprise, this has meant a lot  of things over the years, including  You can say  anything you want, and we can throw your ass in jail for saying it  (i.e., no, "thought crimes". This surprising viewpoint held for till 1801) You can go to jail for saying that you oppose a war - even on the campaign trail   (yup. in 1919 no less! Debs. vs. U.S. ) " Free Speech "  doesn't apply to the states!  (till 1940! Cantwell vs. U.S . ) And the list goes on. For a complete history, read...

via @scalzi ( referring to Kirk Cameron) I will defend to the death your right to say whatever ridiculous, ignorant and bigoted thing that has been fermenting in that cracked clay pot you call a brain pan. But the First Amendment also means that when you say such things, other people have the a right to mock you and the silly, stupid words that have dribbled out of your skull through that word hole above your chin. If you call someone “unnatural,” they might call you an “asshole.” That’s the deal. To put it another way: The First Amendment guarantees a right to speech. It does not guarantee a right to respect . As I am fond of saying, if you want people to respect your ideas, get better ideas. Likewise, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. If you’re going to parade around on television engaging in hateful bastardry, then, strangely enough, people will often call you out on it. They may also call you out on the hypocrisy of maintaining that when   you ...