I have written about this several times in this blog, but I think it deserves repeating because the claims are so utterly pervasive.
The claim that "freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences" is utterly false.
Freedom of speech means PRECISELY freedom from consequences. That's its VERY DEFINITION.
By saying that it "does not mean freedom from consequences" you are trying to define it as the exact opposite of what it is. It's like saying "a free meal does not mean you don't have to pay money for it". No, a "free meal" means precisely that you don't need to pay money for it. Likewise "freedom of speech" means precisely that there are no negative consequences for exercising it. That's the very definition of the concept.
If there are negative consequences from your expression of opinion, then it's not free speech anymore. It's punishable speech. It's restricted speech.
(And no, "negative consequences" does not mean criticism. Criticism of what you are saying is fine, and that in itself is a fundamental part of free speech as well. Criticism of what someone is saying is not a punishment, it's discourse, it's having a conversation.)
Comments
Post a Comment