On Thursday, Charlotte Clymer, the press secretary for the Human Rights Campaign, issued a tweet that seemed highly problematic, stating, “Not all opinions are equal. Not all opinions are deserving of our time and consideration. Not all opinions should be given space in the public square. If you push a ‘belief’ that is directly harmful to others, you have moved past ‘opinion’ and into a threat to public safety.”
That tweet engendered fierce criticism from conservatives; Jason Howerton of The Blaze responded:
“Not all opinions should be given space in the public square." These people think they are qualified to decide which opinions are "harmful" and "allowed" to be shared in the public square. This is some dangerous s*** right here.
Clymer then patronized, “No, Sweetie, you just want the unchecked freedom to spread hateful nonsense that directly harms others, and that bulls*** does not belong in the public square. Period.”
Howerton fired back, “Actually puddin', I want everyone, including you, to be able to speak with all the freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment. It's vital for a free society. Words are not violence, no matter how many times you claim it to be true.”
Clymer then upped the ante, claiming, “Except for all those LGBTQ people who are assaulted, killed, and otherwise discriminated against because of deeply irresponsible, hateful rhetoric, right? But they don’t matter, right, Jason?”
Howerton then fired back, “Incitement of violence is not covered by the First Amendment. So the speech of which you refer to is already illegal. You're not very good at this.”
Clymer tried to respond to Howerton: “Once again, gotta love the bad faith framing here. A literal, explicit call for violence is not required to encourage violence and discrimination against marginalized communities. And the irony with your tragic misunderstanding is that even explicit threats are often ignored.”
Meanwhile, Clymer had switched gears, protesting that the intent was to target anti-vaxxers:
Clymer tried to attack Walsh, doubling down on the claim that the intent was to target anti-vaxxers;
Walsh decided he was done with the posturing:
And one minute later, Allie Beth Stuckey added to the fusillade:
Clymer still tried to wiggle out of the dilemma, answering, "Giving harmful anti-vaxx propaganda a platform that has been shown to directly lead to unnecessary deaths of children? Yeah, I’m pretty damn sure that’s harmful, and every reasonable adult would agree with me."
Stuckey echoed Walsh, snapping, "First of all, that’s not what you said in your original tweet. Even if we agree on vaccinations, that doesn’t mean anti-vax shouldn’t be allowed to share their opinions. The question stands: who gets to decide what other opinions are harmful? Re gender, sexuality, morality, etc?"
H/T The Blaze