Ever since political correctness became a thing in the 80’s limits on “free speech” have been placed to protect certain groups, and while many words we used back then are considered slurs today, and understandably so, I feel we’ve lost the way a bit. People taking offence at everything is a bit out of control. However, JD Vance et al seem more interested in being allowed to spread misinformation unchecked in the name of free speech, and that is something that should be a massive red flag. Free speech is one thing, but there should be consequences when said free speech can incite or fuel negative steroetypes, violence or villification of certain groups.

If you have legal consequences for speech, you don’t have free speech

True, because words have meaning. If I have millions of followers on social media, and I say “Americans have killed hundreds of thousands of Arabs, and all Arabs have a duty to kill Americans”. That is free speech, but i’m inciting people to murder, and that has consequences. Take a look at twitter these days, pure misinformation and blatant racism. This is no longer free speech, this is weaponising words. I know it’s an extremely fine line but have we lost all common sense in the basics of right and wrong?

You’re misunderstanding what I’m saying. I am saying if there is a law establishing legal consequences for speech then you do not have absolute freedom of speech.