Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Gullible-Medium123 t1_iz7o76h wrote

Reply to comment by skylercollins in New Washington state law will require employers to post job salary ranges by Sariel007

Do you consider other accurate labeling requirements to be free speech intrusions as well? (I'm not being snarky, I'm earnestly trying to better understand your perspective here.)

Like packaged food manufacturers being required to include ingredients and nutrition information; car manufacturers reporting miles per gallon according to a standardized test; property owners who wish to enforce access restrictions on their property having to post notice of such restriction ("no trespassing"); data collection companies having to let you know how they intend to use your data (privacy policy and terms of service); news services having at least a nominal duty to the truth; and so on?

6

skylercollins t1_iz8ayru wrote

>Do you consider other accurate labeling requirements to be free speech intrusions as well?

Yes, until it crosses the line and becomes fraud.

>Like packaged food manufacturers being required to include ingredients and nutrition information; car manufacturers reporting miles per gallon according to a standardized test;

Absolutely.

>property owners who wish to enforce access restrictions on their property having to post notice of such restriction ("no trespassing");

This should not be required but it is wise to do in order to avoid legal liability in the harm they bring to trespassers. "I didn't know I was trespassing because there was no indication I was on private property" should be a valid offense when suing somebody for harming you.

>news services having at least a nominal duty to the truth; and so on?

Absolutely.

Lying, defamation, hate speech, all of it are free speech and should be legally protected. Cancel culture can go where the law shouldn't.

2

Gullible-Medium123 t1_iz8bu5k wrote

Interesting. Thank you for taking the time to explain in more detail.

So far I quite disagree, but I don't think I've run into your particular stance before. I will keep an open mind as I research further.

1

skylercollins t1_iz9ji8a wrote

It's just the principled free speech stance taken to its logical conclusion. Wherever you disagree, apply that disagreement consistently across the board and you'll probably reach some very distasteful conclusions, at least I hope you would, assuming you're a kind and decent person.

0