Sorry, Not SorryThe Right should make no apologies for defending free speech—all of it.
By Ray McCoy
January 20, 2022
Radio host Clay Travis recently defended freedom of speech in a way the Right should have been doing all along. In response to Twitter’s recent banning of several people, including Dr. Robert Malone, Travis launched into an unequivocal defense of our First Amendment. But whereas many have reflexively felt the need to add that they don’t necessarily agree with everything the latest victim of such bans says, Travis deliberately went the other way.
“Not only do I not always agree with anyone else 100 percent,” Travis said, “sometimes I don’t even totally agree with my own opinion”—meaning he still must leave room for the possibility that he is wrong.
It is long past time for those on the Right to do away with apologetic defenses of freedom of speech. The reason people so often feel compelled to throw in the caveat that they are different from the person they are defending is because they do not want to risk the costs of guilt by association. Enough of this.
* * *
We should remember that when defending a person’s liberty—freedom of speech in particular—it is totally redundant to state one’s disagreement with that person as a caveat. The purpose of having a right such as freedom of speech is in order to permit disagreement between individuals and their peers, the government, churches and religious bodies, and other institutions. You are not required to like what another person says in order to defend his or her right to say it.
* * *
Source:
https://amgreatness.com/2022/01/20/sorry-not-sorry/