Our FOS was never a permission slip to say w/e we wanted. It was to protect us from holding our reps accountable for their corrupt actions. Now we have to use it along with our Freedom of protest to fix it all.

1A is certainly NOT limited to speech regarding corrupt actions of government officials. Speech pertaining to the actions of the government (whether corrupt or not) is only one form of speech protected by 1A.

In order to understand everything you have to understand the purpose behind it. The purpose behind the freedom of speech was to hold our elected officials accountable. Because they hated politicians.

James Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights, was a politician.

Whatever the original motive, it is absolutely not limited to that. There is no judicial ruling that says it does not apply to anything other than speech about the government. To the contrary, many 1A cases have not involved speech pertaining to the government.

Lying to ppl on the street very rarely leads to ppl having to fear dor their lives. Holding politicians accountable can bring threats to ones lives. Forget what the courts have argued over the last 250yrs. It was to hold our politicians accountable. I'm aware of Madison btw. If alive today he'd...

....agree that the fix to all of this is a seperation of beliefs and state. Beliefs being anything not proven by good science. It was him who professed the seperation of church and state. That got muddled and because of that we have to seperate beliefs out. In order to clean it all up.

No. The purpose of freedom of speech was so you can speak freely. Do you think lies didn’t exist when the First Amendment was written?

Lying to other people doesn't really bring about life-threatening consequences though. So why would we need protection from that? I understand not everyone is going to understand what I know and that's okay. The fact is politicians were supposed to hold their words true and they didn't. Then...

Really? Have you heard of MAHA? Of course it brings about life-threatening consequences. Anti-vaxxers? Of course that brings about life-threatening consequences. We don't understand what you think you know because what you think you know is flat-out wrong. Never were "politicans supposed to hold

their words true" under 1A. There are numerous court decisions holding that lying in campaigns can't be restricted and a SCOTUS case in 2012 that said the same.

Attacking me is what monsters want you to do. Goodbye

Cool.

... We allowed them to get away with it. Now the system is the monster that's making us all sick. It's why we have all that we do. My question for you along with everyone else is are you going to keep letting it kill us?

It’s cute you think allowing politicians to determine who gets to say what is going to make things better.

Politicians will never make the system better. It's already ☠️. And they've been oppressing us with their unjust laws for generations now. All of those laws are why we have the plague in our streets. The only way to solve everything is to build a better system. 1 where monsters can't manipulate it

If you think politicians held their words true in the days of the Founding Fathers you should go back and read what they were saying about each other.

Of course they didn't. So why the hell were we groomed into thinking that this was a perfect democracy? They never claimed it was perfect. They claimed it was an experiment. Interesting thing about experiments is that you have to test for all fail points before you can claim something as perfect.

The system they built died. It's officially dead. They really didn't care about the system. They cared about their happiness. & if we don't show the same care for our own happiness we too will die with it. Our grandparents told us it was perfect.

So all your posts to this point about the meaning behind the First Amendment are just bullshit?

I'm beyond this conversation. Have an amazing day.

Your whole premise is based on what the Founding Fathers meant by the First Amendment but the barest examination proves you incorrect.

Freedom of speech and the press is absolutely permission to say what we want with a few very narrow exceptions. And yes - we can use it to hold elected officials accountable but it is a little wild to think they should be passing laws about what they can and cannot say.