• seitanic@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hate speech is not the same as free speech.

    “Free” is not a type of speech. It is the ability to speak. You can freely say all kinds of things. They could be hateful or not.

    • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Germany has extremely harsh laws on language which promotes Nazis, but they clearly still have free speech. We can discourage hateful language and still maintain freedom of expression.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes it is possible. The problem is the amendment itself and the context in which it was written. Germany got to make their laws about it 150 years later, taking advantage of modern democratic experience. In 1792 it was extremely prevalent that governments would use any excuse to shut down political opposition. Thus the difference.

        We should absolutely have evolved it by now instead of turning it into scripture.

        • Syndic@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          We should absolutely have evolved it by now instead of turning it into scripture.

          But you did and still have that very option. That’s exactly what the amendments are for! The first was enacted just a few years after the foundation of the US and the last was added in 1992. The US does have the tools to better safeguard themself against fascists if they want to. But of course that’s rather difficult when a big part of the GOP has absolutely no scruple to flirt with overthrowing the whole system.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not just that. There are large parts of the US where they teach the Bill of Rights next to the Ten Commandments. Theoretically we could amend the first or second amendment. In reality I chose the word “scripture” for a reason.

        • stevedidwhat_infosec@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Would you stick your hand inside the massive machine that is Americas laws and founding documents to fix those gears?

          Unfortunately, I’m not so sure we can pause such a machine with all the other chaos that goes around us. Maybe it’s time America finally get their fucking hands out of every other country and start handling its own shit so we can stay a country instead of immanent collapse.

          • Syndic@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Would you stick your hand inside the massive machine that is Americas laws and founding documents to fix those gears?

            That’s exactly what the amendments are for. And the last of them was enacted in 1992. So the tools are there.

            The main problem is that a big part of the GOP have and will continue to betray everything the US has stood for if it means for them to keep a bit longer in power.

            • stevedidwhat_infosec@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              That’s a good point. We’ve made many good corrections as time has gone on.

              What are some things that the GOP did specifically to make it harder to do amendments or that are trying to to do? It’s always good to name names and put things into specific words. Otherwise it’s just another loose, general statement without any real backing know what I mean?

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s never a good time and the longer we wait the worse it gets. If a Constitutional Convention isn’t ratified then we can keep on going with the previous version. The biggest problem is one side has been working on locking up state legislatures and they aren’t going to play nice with representation at a convention.