Yeah, that argument too. I didn't mention the first amendment though. For example it is also a requirement for basic science within the framework of enlightenment.

I get the xkcd and it certainly has a valid context. This is not it though. This retort just underlines a perspective that is characterized by severe lack of foresight, simple as that.

▲

ceejayoz 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Perspective: “you can’t point out that I’m being an asshole to my friends and employers” is very non-free-speech. First Amendment or not.

Doubly so when the people saying you can’t are the government.

▲

raxxorraxor 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I don't even get the point you are trying to make. The issue is removing people due to their political opinions. This might have happened to Kimmel now.

You are still free to associate with anyone freely, but there is an expectation that you behave like an adult and can withstand different opinions. Otherwise no sensible dialogue is possible. Obviously that was not the case for the murderer of Kirk and the general sentiment is that some political factions have had difficulties here as well.

	▲	ceejayoz 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> The issue is removing people due to their political opinions. No. The issue is who is doing that action. Illegal speech is not the same as rude speech. My boss can’t declare my opinions illegal. They can fire me. > You are still free to associate with anyone freely, but there is an expectation that you behave like an adult and can withstand different opinions. Nah. I can throw a tantrum, publicly decry you as an asshole and go no-contact with you. That’s legal, and part of my freedom of expression and association. The government can’t confiscate my license over the tantrum.