Thought about this for a whole day nostr:nprofile1qqsp4lsvwn3aw7zwh2f6tcl6249xa6cpj2x3yuu6azaysvncdqywxmgprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuumwdae8gtnnda3kjctvqy2hwumn8ghj7etyv4hzumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgs2ys7q . Hang tight with me for a moment while I flush this out.

Free speech isn’t a standalone right floating in a cultural vacuum, it’s part of a moral ecosystem.

When transcendent moral law governs both conscience and civil authority, free speech serves truth seeking and genuine discourse. But when that foundation erodes, speech becomes mere power projection. Whoever screams loudest wins.

Here’s the uncomfortable truth. All law is inherently moral law. There’s no such thing as morally neutral governance. The question isn’t whether we’ll have a moral framework, but which one.

Free speech thrives when people share enough common ground to believe truth exists and is worth pursuing together. Strip away that shared foundation, and “free speech” becomes just another weapon in the culture war.

The founders knew that self governance requires a moral people. No system of laws, however clever, can substitute for the internal constraints of conscience formed by transcendent truth.

We can have ordered liberty under higher law, or we can have chaos under the arbitrary rule of men. There is no third option.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​