Mr Data gets it…
(media.greatawakening.win)
Comments (23)
sorted by:
Put more succinctly: Everyone has a right to speak. No one has the right to be heard.
I have the right not to listen to their stupidity.
Isnt that the sort of logic that got all conservatives shadow banned from the internet
See my answer to this elsewhere in this post.
Beware. This is an excuse to censor. I have a right to listen or not. I have a right to speak or stay silent.
The right to be heard is under my right to listen.
Slopes of a slippery nature are afoot.
No censorship implied at all. I'm just saying that nay idiot Democrat is free to say whatever he wants, it's his right. But I am under no obligation to listen to his drivel...as is my right.
agreed.
An example.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
This has been used to ban beliefs. The lib will twist anything to get their way.
I knew what you meant. I also know what a lib would do with your words.
Thank you, anon.
You sound like the ceo of Twitter.
I don't see your problem with this simple statement. Sure, someone has the right to speak. But I don't have an obligation to listen. NONE of us have an obligation to listen to anyone. What is it that you don't get about this? It's not complicated. Just because some blowhard issues a "Manifesto" or starts Tweeting out stuff, does NOT mean that he has an absolute right to be heard... by ANYONE.
If someone were ranting in the streets about invisible men or the CIA or whatever people rant in the streets about these days, are you obligated to stand there and listen to him? If you DO feel obligated to do so, I feel sorry for you. But if you quickly identify him as a fruitcake, I suspect you would just quickly walk on by and ignore him.
So while he is exercising his absolute right to speak, he can expect absolutely zero right to be heard. Not all assertions or speech is equal.
It's really a simple concept; I'm surprised you don't get it.
I understand the statement. But I’m just making a point that she legit said that. You have freedom of speech not freedom of reach.
It’s an observation not an attack.
Ah... point taken.
I'm kind of surprised at people misinterpreting this, as well. Maybe if it was expressed as:
Exactly. It's not rocket science. If people are not REQUIRED to listen to someone, then that person has no "right" to be heard. Hitler and Castro had a "right to be heard" as it was enforced by armed men. No one in America... yet... has a right to be heard. We listen to people who make sense, who have something new, profound, or interesting to say, but we do that willingly. None of those people, no matter how articulate or brilliant, have a right to be heard, any more than Ford making cars does not have a right to make us buy them. We listen to smart people because we WANT to, not because they have some "right" to be heard. They only have a right to speak...everything following that is based on the actual rights of others, to listen or ignore.
I always found it amusing that for them to be heard, others NEED to be silenced.
We heard you, we just don't care.
Precisely!
Dr. Polasky is an excellent choice for Karen memes. well done.
She was a preachy one.
Pulaski was written to be a pink-washed Bones and they wanted her dynamic with Data to be like Bones/Spock.
I feel for Diana Muldaur. She replaced the fan/cast favorite who was fired because of a slimey writer. Then they give her a character so crappy no amount talent could save.
No wonder she left after the 2nd season.
I always liked what Pulaski brought to the episodes she was in.
While Data appears to be studying her DNA. Lending Darwin a helping hand.
based data
u/catsfive