To deny free speech is to deny the very core of democracy, that everyone's opinion can be heard, whether their opinions are embraced or rejected is irrelevant. Threats are objective, but hate is subjective. No one is trying to ban speech about hating Nazis, after all. And in a hypothetical scenario where they somehow seized power, they'd be able to throw your own words back in your face about hate speech and then proceed to define it as anything that went against their ideals.
"I'll kill you" is a threat and can be acted upon.
"You should die" is an opinion. Yes, a hateful one, but merely an opinion.
The "Slippery slope" is an opinion. Nice try.
So if people finagle their word choice it's no longer a problem? Because that can and has been abused to avoid consequences.
And free speech absolutists typically take the humanity out of the recipient of insulting, demeaning and hateful stinky onions, with a "suck it up, buttercup, this is freedom, deal with it" attitude.
The government can't take away your onions from a platform. That's it.
The "free market" and admins on a website CAN however, as they are NOT the government.
No one is telling the government to take your onions away.
But a private organization will often be asked to. Especially on the Internet.
Do want the Internet to become a public space to spread your various onions at the cost of redefining a s**tton of laws for the sake of your onions, or do you want private internet where sites can chop your onions and screw with your data?
And we're already at the government chopping up onions that give the leaders of many places bad gas in multiple countries by declaring them garlic, so even the free speech absolutists are at risk, but they tend to butter these leaders' onions, so they don't care about other's onions being chopped or being declared garlic.
Freedom of speech has to be tempered on a personal level...don't be a dick and force your more rotten onions(ones that involve theoretical or execution of harm) onto another person's plate simply because you can under the law of a government. But many free speech absolutist onion slingers simply don't have a filter, demand non-freedom of speech absolutist onion slingers filter out what should be equally fresh or stinky onions by their own logic, and tend to drown those with different onions in a wave of threats prepared as onions in order to skirt rules and to demean and silence those who want their onions heard if those onions aren't the same.
The free speech absolutist thing works in theory but not in practice, execution, or reality. Think about it.
