[atmosx]

Speech is either free or not free, there is no middle path.

If you want free speech, you accept the consequences. If you want “regulated” speech, there are consequences.

That’s it. I would argue that the level of satire a society can cope with, is directly proportional to the quality of democracy the society has.

[dwaltrip]

Ignoring nuance doesn't make it disappear. Every developed country on earth regulates speech to varying degrees.

[matt4077]

> the level of satire a society can cope with, is directly proportional to the quality of democracy

You're contradicting yourself: First, you deny that there are graduations in "freedom", saying it's all-or-nothing.

But then, a democracy's quality is apparently proportional to its freedom of speech, implying that there are, indeed, nuances.

[basch]

Free speech is a principal (one that existed before the United States) and a goal. You can have a goal, and operate principally, and still have univerally agreed upon edge cases and exceptions.

[ilovecaching]

> I would argue that the level of satire a society can cope with, is directly proportional to the quality of democracy the society has.

So where does that put America :)