Re:Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regu...
by echelon on Monday August 11, 2025 @06:13PM
(#44870051)
> Except that, in practice the defense of self styled free speech advocates did not extended to left, gay, radical feminists, progressives anyone not far right.
It absolutely has.
LGBT rights:
https://www.aclu.org/legislative-attacks-on-lgbtq-rights-202...
NAMBLA:
https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-statement-defending...
HIV:
https://www.aclu.org/cases/outmemphis-v-lee
BLM:
https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/in-a-major-win-for-our-r...
Women's rights:
https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/supreme-court-rejects-ap...
Re:Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regu...
by watwut on Tuesday August 12, 2025 @04:01AM
(#44873604)
That is all aclu which is (per articles posted in this thread) too much left and therefore not free speech by definition.
The hill article even articulated exactly that position openly.
Except that, in practice the defense of self styled free speech advocates did not extended to left, gay, radical feminists, progressives anyone not far right.
In what world is NY times left leaning.
> If you're uneasy about this, remember that freedom of speech does not mean freedom from judgement.
Somehow that part did applied to only selected groups. Criticising right and conservatives was treated as grave danger to free speech by the self styled free speech advocates.
The big crisis of free speech is never about speech rights of anyone left of center. Literally even now.