But in a free society, you also have a duty to defend speech to which you may strongly object.
I know what you're saying, but I'm going to have to @mughat you here and say "excuse me."
I wouldn't go as far as saying that there's a duty to defend people's ability to say things I disagree with. Instead, I would classify it as more intellectually honest to defend the ability for people to have a platform to express bad ideas.
Because if an idea is bad, you can tell by the idea. You really shouldn't need to preemptively block it. So in that way, I agree. I just wouldn't call it a duty.
Interesting comment, at first I took it as a little petty. After giving it some consideration, it does matter.
Most important take away I received from SteemSpeak during the Mughat days: speak more carefully, it does matter.
Yep, I can see that. Hopefully, it's just a matter of precision. I think "duty" has extra baggage that is nice to eject from the discussion. But yeah, I also agree it can be petty and knit-picky. If we all know what we really mean, why make the distinction at all, right?
I am working on speaking more precisely, but I also don't want to be a studdering idiot, due to carefully selecting words. :)
There is balance in change.