Overlook if you can every instance of the words “misleading,” “deceptive” and “heavily edited” that Planned Parenthood has associated with the undercover videos released by the Center for Medical Progress alleging organ harvesting by the organization.
Ignore that Dr. Deborah Nucatola, featured in the very first video, reportedly deleted her social media accounts after the video was released despite her free speech rights to say whatever she pleases.
Forget about the video that Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards made apologizing for Nucatola’s “tone and statements,” which she described as “unacceptable” and uncharacteristic of Planned Parenthood’s compassion.
But most of all — and this could be difficult for many — set aside whatever feelings you have about abortion. Is it a violent act against a living thing? Who knows?
With all that in mind, try to imagine just what columnist Jessica Valenti thinks she can pull off this week.
— Liz Finnegan (@TheGingerarchy) December 22, 2015
If you’re looking for a brilliant legal takedown of Valenti’s discovery of the need for quotation marks around “free” in free speech, Ken White offers an exhaustive explanation at popehat.com. “Valenti’s eager advocacy for censorship is not tethered to illegally recorded videos or misleading videos or even videos with explicit lies,” writes White: “it’s an explicit call to censor political speech that makes people mad, whether or not it’s intended or likely to cause imminent violence.”
Recommended
@lizzyf620 The "Rights for me, but I get to quash, censor or do worse to you when you do/say something I disagree with" crowd is tiresome…
— ?? Vlad3060 ?? (@DavidJBohm) December 22, 2015
@lizzyf620 I'm starting to see the value of Jessica Valenti. She's like a compass that always points in a direction you can safely rule out.
— Haunted Backlog (@Haunted_Backlog) December 22, 2015
@lizzyf620 Oh Valenti, there aren't enough sharks in the world for you to jump
— My Name is Sagat (@MyNameIsSagat) December 22, 2015
@lizzyf620 A lot of things could be considered misleading. Miss Jessica this article you wrote is misleading. Can I censor you?
— Lightsong (@LightsongGamer) December 22, 2015
@lizzyf620 All speech is free even hers, oh I forgot, if it goes against the narrative then it should be censored right?
— Rathdranalon (@Daicheal) December 22, 2015
@lizzyf620 And yet Valenti's misleading articles are exempt. Neat.
— Chad Nine (@Chad_Nine) December 22, 2015
https://twitter.com/Mikell_Pine/status/679147821166120960
@lizzyf620 Sometimes I read something so dumb it renders me speechless. This is one of those times.
— ClumpOfCells, CRE (@CalkinsMark) December 22, 2015
https://twitter.com/Stmpy_Mch/status/679146926864924672
@lizzyf620 @redsteeze so who gets to decide what is free speech?
— John Banner (@LittleDawg1410) December 22, 2015
https://twitter.com/phloog/status/679139575479013377
https://twitter.com/phloog/status/679139233177710592
@lizzyf620 Look out, we have a left-wing authoritarian bad ass over here defining free speech like she's the SCOTUS.
— Teddy Parks (@teddyspaghetti) December 22, 2015
@lizzyf620 @seanmdav
It's more a matter of life and death for babies being aborted.— MinnesotaJen (@minnesota_jen) December 22, 2015
Join the conversation as a VIP Member