Read on Twitter
I've noticed that the right leaning half of America has (or at least pretends to have) a SERIOUS problem with understanding the difference between The First Amendment and free speech as a philosophical concept.
Free speech is a fairly nebulous ideal that in a morally strong society, everyone should be allowed to speak their mind and share their ideas as long as it does not harm others to do so.
The 1st Amendment is a constitutional law prohibiting the federal government from punishing people for saying things, or attempting to restrict what people can say.
Over time the right appears to have combined these two things in their head, and believe that the first amendment to the US Constitution guarantees them protection from any consequences from ANYONE that might result from their words or actions.
More relevantly to recent events, they believe that everyone in the US (e.g. companies like twitter) are also bound by this law in the same way the federal government is, so cannot take any action or inaction that might reduce their ability to share their speech with people.
TLDR:
1: Free speech is a good thing, but it's not a law and even as a concept it'd never meant that you get to be a massive asshole and face no repercussions.
2: Only the government can violate the First Amendment. It's a law that protects us from the government.
1: Free speech is a good thing, but it's not a law and even as a concept it'd never meant that you get to be a massive asshole and face no repercussions.
2: Only the government can violate the First Amendment. It's a law that protects us from the government.
