[claytongulick]

The gray area is the definition of "intolerant".

For example, reasonable people may view anyone who disagrees with same sex marriage as intolerant.

Those same reasonable people may also agree with your point above.

The result? Suppression of speech about a controversial political process, and the weakening of the democratic process.

[malermeister]

Speaking of gay marriage - a gay club was shot up the other day and the intolerant celebrated on Twitter.

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2022/11/21/libs-of-tiktok-colorad...

Speech isn't some high minded abstract thing, it has real life consequences and the kind of speech that gets people killed needs to be suppressed.

[claytongulick]

Thanks for the classic example of a pathos argument, this is something that both political parties excel at: take a single example of a tragedy and use it as an emotional hammer to stifle dissent.

Of course, we need not reason about or think about the atrocities that have resulted from government controlled media and speech - according to your point, we're supposed to infer that somehow maybe if we just controlled speech more this awful thing wouldn't have happened.

Nevermind that the shooter was apparently non-binary, suffered awful abuse, was bullied and severely disturbed... No the solution is to limit that pesky free speech. Then everything will be fine?

Oh, and also the link you posted doesn't in any way represent what you claim it did. Nothing in there celebrated the shooting, that link discusses "libs of TikTok" account criticizing an organization that promotes drag performing to children. Poor timing, sure... But not exactly the smoking gun excuse to limit freedom of expression that you suggest it is.