πππ πͺπ΄ π©π’π΅π¦ π΄π±π¦π¦π€π©?
ππ’π΅π¦ ππ±π¦π¦π€π© is to the First Amendment what ππ΄π΄π’πΆππ΅ ππ¦π’π±π°π― is to the Second Amendment. A nebulous political term that can used to fit political narratives and allow politicians to erode civil liberties.
You are correct.
“Hate Speech” is a made-up red herring of the last few decades, and should be removed from the vocabulary. All that matters is this:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
You might summarize the First Amendment as “free speech shall not be abridged”. Then compare with the Second Amendment where the phrase “shall not be infringed” is used.
As Rush used to say “words have meanings” and those words could not be any more clear.
Bingo!
Good analogy.