It’s not this. Of course, freedom of expression must prevail and everyone believes what they want.
But everyone’s freedom has limits at the point when it conflicts with that of others.
It doesn’t bother me that someone believes that the world is 6000 years old and started with Adam and Eve, but when they manage to implement this belief in teaching as a valid theory.
The main thing in a society is to eliminate ignorance, not to encourage it, because without knowledge there is no freedom.
So free speech should be limited if people use it irresponsibly? Would you say the same of other types of freedom? If people vote for something harmful is it justified to remove their voting rights?
I would support a democracy of idiots over a benevolent king. I support free speech of idiots over benevolent censors.
It’s not this. Of course, freedom of expression must prevail and everyone believes what they want. But everyone’s freedom has limits at the point when it conflicts with that of others. It doesn’t bother me that someone believes that the world is 6000 years old and started with Adam and Eve, but when they manage to implement this belief in teaching as a valid theory. The main thing in a society is to eliminate ignorance, not to encourage it, because without knowledge there is no freedom.
So free speech should be limited if people use it irresponsibly? Would you say the same of other types of freedom? If people vote for something harmful is it justified to remove their voting rights?