Family and Crisis of Individual-Based Free Speech!

[sunandmoon]

Family

Individuals should be isolated from matters which concern family.
Family is of the utmost importance, and family is expressed vividly in most Christian texts.
Human nature took an awkward turn! Individuality is, at present, thought of as more important than family, individuals are given a voice on matters which concern families.
Free speech is not really free, because if I want to speak for my family, I must speak from an individual perspective; therefore I would be speaking for myself.

Crisis of Individual-Based Free Speech

I was just playing Pokemon Moon; an African / Asian sexual fantasy, with White, and their vibrant personality, in the middle.
Secretly, through imagery and sleight, players are taught to be dirty towards Foreigners, from a young age!
It hints to Foreigners, on White land, "do what you can ((the younger the better) it's heroism)"; treating white gender systems as exploits.
This sort of information is hot, I may end up being diagnosed with an illness!
You may run these words through a psychology system, play a bit of Pokemon and prove me insane - it's not going to stop White families appearing weak...
Whites, there are so many weaknesses in your system because of pseudo-(individual based)-free speech.

ADDITIONAL NOTE: For the forgetful and foolish, the winner takes the spoils in war.

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

It's entirely unclear to me what you want to discuss. If you are just posting thoughts with no aim toward discussion, you should start up a blog somewhere.

[sunandmoon]

!

Moderator Note

It's entirely unclear to me what you want to discuss. If you are just posting thoughts with no aim toward discussion, you should start up a blog somewhere.

Am I allowed to respond to this?

 

What I want to discuss:

Free speech is not really free, because if I want to speak for my family, I must speak from an individual perspective; therefore I would be speaking for myself.

[swansont]

Am I allowed to respond to this?

 

What I want to discuss:

Free speech is not really free, because if I want to speak for my family, I must speak from an individual perspective; therefore I would be speaking for myself.

 

 

That's not what is usually meant by free speech. That phrase is typically used in the context of government censorship, or the lack thereof.

 

Seems to me that only being able to speak for yourself, and not representing others, is an issue of individuality. You can't speak for me, because you are not me.

[Strange]

Free speech is not really free, because if I want to speak for my family, I must speak from an individual perspective; therefore I would be speaking for myself.

 

 

Or you could read a statement prepared and agreed by all members of your family. In that way you are free to speak for them.

[sunandmoon]

 

 

Or you could read a statement prepared and agreed by all members of your family. In that way you are free to speak for them.

Not really, all of my family will be treated individually.

 

I understand, pitted against another human individual, or an individual speaking for a family, that, that individual probably has no respect for my family, and will be disrespectful to some degree when I speak for my family.

 

I can't, with substantial effect, for example, argue that an individual, or group of individuals, act is incorrect, because it endangers my family,

 

If I could speak for my family, the fact that someone has no respect for my family, wouldn't matter; which is my point about free-speech.

[swansont]

 

If I could speak for my family, the fact that someone has no respect for my family, wouldn't matter; which is my point about free-speech.

 

 

Which is about the nature of individuality, and not about free speech. This is not a freedom that anyone can claim to inherently have, nor can it be granted by any government.