Your example is exactly why I say a better term is "freedom of expression." In this light, it's a bit easier to accept the Supreme Court jurisprudence here. Yelling fire in a theater is not an expression of one's thoughts or beliefs, but instead is violative of others rights, and thus not protected speech (under the First Amendment). Similarly, speech meant to defame another individual, e.g. calling Dewg a murderer, is also not an expression of one's thoughts or beliefs, and thus not protected speech. Saying that you think Dewg is a murderer if you, in fact, think Dewg is a murderer, is an expression, and is not defamatory, thus constitutes protected speech.We do, however, place restrictions on speech. I'm free to criticize the government while standing on a street corner, without fear of retaliation from the government. I am not, however, free to yell "fire" in a crowded square, tell a stranger that I'm going to murder him and his family, or make false claims, harming someone - such as calling someone a child molester when they are not.
Many examples, like those above, are black and white and easy to recognize. But when things get subjective, it's harder to stand on constitutional certitude. The problem is when people walk the fine line, and make false statements, but carefully crafted to be opinions. Those educated in critical thinking can usually see past the hyperbole. But some people will be swayed by those statements, which could lead to counterproductive and antisocial behaviors.
Here are some examples:
Dewg is a murderer
I think Dewg may be a murderer
I've been hearing things that make me believe Dewg is a murderer
If you look at his past, and what's he's done recently, you'll conclude that Dewg is a murderer
All these statements are intending to alter the thinking of the recipient that Dewg is a murder. But which ones are illegal, not protected by "free speech", and which ones are protected by "free speech"?
My apologies for this little side-bar that took us farther off topic in a Tesla forum.
Would some people be swayed by false and defamatory statements? Maybe, but it's better that free expression, including thoughts and expressions of hate, bigotry, violence, misogyny, and the like, be given the light of day so that such ideas can be countered with rational rebuttal instead of driven into dark corners where they swell and fester.
