I did say you changed the context of the topic by inserting in your original comment ( Free Speech).
Yes ... I am guilty of making a comment on his statement... it is a forum.
Yes ... I am guilty of pointing out an aspect of his comment that I disagree with... I do disagree with it... and I gave a reason.
Yes ... he did not originally post about free speech directly ... I referenced free speech as an explanation of one reason why I was disagreeing with his statement... not the only reason.
Discussion , statements , and suggestions do not exist in a vacuum ... If someone wants to make on a public forum the statement,
those who advocate this and claim to be Americans are traitors and need to be treated as such.
That person is opening his statement up to the critique of others.
I disagree with it ... and free speech is one reason why I disagree with it.
The topic you make this remark about has nothing to do with free speech at all.
I wonder how many people ( and their loved ones ) who would get labeled as traitors and treated as such ( executed ) ... just for advocating to friends and family about the benefits of having a king, would feel... would they agree with you that this had nothing to do with free speech at all? ... they would not feel any different about speaking freely?
What you did was swing the topic another direction.
What I did was give one of the reasons why I disagree with the statement.
If you think that reason is not justified ... that those labeled and treated as traitors would not have their free speech effected ... please explain... ( as you did a bit bellow. )
We don't need your input on that subject.
Never said you did...
I said I disagreed with the statement ... and offered one of the reasons why I disagree with it.
If you don't like that ... ok ... fine ... don't like me having reasons , or me telling you what they are ???
If you disagree with that specific reason ... please explain? ( as you did a bit bellow )
Who is a traitor?
One who takes action on destroying our rights. Yes, a person can be a traitor for taking a verbal stand but it would be a weak case if one tried to prosecute in court. I am quite sure we could find plenty of traitors in our midsts. Might be hard to fetter out too but they are here and they are actively trying to undermine our country. Don't blind yourself to the truth.
I have no doubt that some actual traitors might speak out publicly or privately one way or the other.
I have no doubt that an actual traitor might be making an intentional effort to subvert from within.
But that does not mean that everyone who advocates those things is a traitor.
A 100% loyal , and faithful U.S. citizen might honestly think that a monarchy would be a good idea ... for him to speak his thoughts does not in itself make him a traitor... even if it is advocating that position... he has not betrayed anyone... he has not sold anyone out ... etc.
Yes ... some types of speech we restrict ... if it does harm ... and as you say a case can be made in a court of law about it ... and we do punish people who abuse speech to harm society itself or members of that society ... but we do not just declare them to be traitors and treat them as such... we declare their activity to be illegal and treat it as a different kind of crime... and even if we did this is public movements toward monarchy ... that would still be a very different crime than being a traitor.
Who is making the subjective determination that someone is advocating something ? ... you wouldn't want to be thought of as being an advocate ... even if you weren't ... because being an perceived as an advocate would be a death sentence... talk about a step in the wrong direction of society and personal freedoms.
Being critical about the government could also be something an actual traitor would do ... should we also round up all those people critical of the government label and treat them as traitors?
I think only actual traitors ( those caught betraying the country ) ... selling military secrets , etc ... should be treated as traitors ... all of the indirect and second hand types of 'potential traitors' is a slippery slope ... and a bad idea.