• Aceticon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    “Freedom of Speech” is not “Freedom to get a free soapbox anywhere you feel like whenever you feel like”.

    In your version, anybody in the World has a right to address Congress whenever they feel like, in which case it should be first come first served and Netanyahu can join the line just everybody else (as giving priority to some would interfere in everybody else’s “Freedom”).

    • S_204@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      28
      ·
      6 months ago

      No one is saying free speech is giving the entire world a soapbox wherever they want .

      We’re talking about someone who has been invited by the speaker of the House to speak in front of Congress. This isn’t any random person on a soapbox. This is the speaker of the House of Representatives making an official US government invitation to an ally. Undermining that is absolutely stifling Free speech.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’m sorry but Free Speech is exactly about anybody, a.k.a. random, persons having a freedom, and there is no mention about “allies” or any other special groups having any more right to it than anybody else exactly because you can’t have one Freedom for some and a different Freedom for others: Free it’s for everybody, otherwise it’s not Free, it’s Controlled.

        You claim this is a Free Speech matter and then your entire argument is about speech for some people controlled by an invitation of a specifica person, the very opposite of Free.

        As I said, if Congress should be treated as a Free Speech space then ANYBODY has a right to go there and speak (and Netanyahu can join the queue), if only some people are allowed to go there, controlled by an invitation by a specific person, then it’s not Free Speech, it’s about a space with access limited by rules, be it to speak or something else, so it’s about Congressional Rules and your entire “argument” is total bollocks.

        You can’t try and bypass the rules by claiming it’s all about Free Speech at the very same time you want it for just this one person just this one time - that’s just complete total hypocrisy.

        • S_204@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          20
          ·
          6 months ago

          Sure, you’ve convinced me, anyone that the speaker of the house thinks deserves that platform should have it then, ally or not.

          That you think limiting the ability of people to speak before Congress, isn’t stifling free speech is beyond absurd.

          • Agrivar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Why don’t you just give Bibi a nice reach-around, and leave the rest of us out of it?

            • S_204@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              6 months ago

              I’m hardly concerned with who’s the one giving the speech and entirely concerned with the fact the Democratic party is working overtime to stifle Free speech before the American Congress.