Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences of anything you say. Not allowing non citizens to not enter based on what they said is not an infringement of any of their rights. Or should we just let anyone come over from abroad and not look into who we're letting into the country at all?
Discussion
No we should definitely read their emails first. 😵💫
This is gonna be so great for all the places that depend on tourism for local jobs – and just in time for the World Cup next summer!
Bet you look at social media of people who come to your house you don't know.
I really don't... There have been very extensive qualification processes for a long time for anyone looking to enter the US with any one of the available visas. This here is thought police.
They want every tourist to submit a DNA sample. This is next-level retarded. You can’t make this stuff up.
https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2025-22461.pdf
I don't have Facebook so I understand if you don't either but if you did have a Facebook and you made an event on Facebook and someone said they were going to attend your event and you didn't know them, you wouldn't click on their profile? You wouldn't want to know who that person is coming to your house?
You are probably right. I guess it comes to the fact I don't throw party so I have not found myself in that situation. Though, I've attended plenty of parties and while curiously clicked through others profiles I have not extensively checked the whole guest list. On occasion I might have sold something on marketplace and maybe I don't remember correctly but I don't think I did like a whole screening. I could see now how a little of that wouldn't have hurt.
It's situational of course. Your kids birthday party at your house? I would make sure I at least browsed the profile of anyone who said they'd come. I don't like selling things on marketplace out of my home. I always meet at a busy public place.
So basically you have free speech as long as you don't say the wrong things. Nice, by that definition every single country in human history has had free speech. North Korea has free speech according to your definition. You can say what you want, it's physically possible, you'll just have to suffer the consequences for it.
North Koreans do have a natural right of free speech... Everyone does. That's what rights are. The US is the only place that has a constitutional protection for speech. That still doesn't mean threats of violence is free speech. It's a pretty easy line to draw. You don't have to obfuscate it to make your argument look better.
You're retarded and moving the goal post.
I don't think so... Your counter to what I said is "you're retarded" what did I say that was wrong?
Saying "Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences" is an utterly retarded thing to say. As I correctly pointed out. You then try to move the conversation towards violent threats which makes you retarded.
What's retarded is not changing your opinion of someone based on things they say. So say some old racist person slings the n word everywhere in public. I'm not supposed to judge his character because freedom of speech? That's pretty fucking retarded. So when someone says "I hate Palestinians", Gaza should let them in because freedom of speech? Don't act like you live by anyone can say anything and I don't pass judgements based on their speech. That's not what you do. Freedom of speech doesn't mean you get to decide how other people have to feel about that speech. It's not an argument. It's just reality. Present a counter to that.