10-09-2019, 03:19 PM
(10-09-2019, 02:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: But in this case the facts are clear that this action would be likely to cause severe psychological and possibly physical harm. So I don't see any issue with it being "over broad".
For example I see you refused to say that inciting violence should not be against the law. So it seems that you agree that harassment and/or cyber bullying should be against the law just not in this case where it would protect a member of the LGBTQ community.
You sure? How many times have people been outed they didn't kill themselves? "Likely to" when it comes to psychological harm is where you lose me and most likely the court and jury. Again, what one person will kill themselves over another person will get over quickly. My uncle was outed by an ex lover (Was introduced as a buddy) at a family function, he didn't kill himself and he appeared to handle it well enough as he came to Thanksgiving with his new boyfriend a few months later. By your definition of "Likely to" cause psychological harm he should have been arrested, but again that stuff happens every day and no jury is going to convict someone for doing so.
That aside, in most of those cases the judges commented that the language was hateful and possibly caused emotional harm (being called a slut on twitter, exposing DMs related to sexual experiences, etc) but the person doing the speech still held that right because it didn't meet the imminent lawless action prong they were looking for similar to the inciting violence test.
No, I am saying cyberbulling should not be against the law unless it has a call to action or statement of violence, or if the messaging becomes repetitive to the point of being a general nuisance. Saying you should do something against this person, threatening to do something against this person, tell this person to do something to themselves or a pattern of repetitive hateful messaging all would fall under Cyberbullying/Harassment.
I told you why I was okay with it, because there is a litmus test to define where free speech ends. This has nothing to do with LGBTQ as much as you want to make it that. I have contended from the start that in multiple scenarios I throw out, it isn't Harassment/Cyberbullying. You are the one that keep bringing that piece up, I am stating that has no barring on if it is or isn't.
