My question was not rhetorical. If someone doesn't mean constitutional law, _then what do they mean_? You seem to be simply arguing there is no universal concept of freedom. Is that the answer then? Because we have a precedent for redefining words in various ways already, we can choose to add whatever else we desire to the list? I rather assumed it had something to do with redefining "hate speech" (e.g. as violence or something) not redefining freedom.