"And whether the consequences of free speech are dealt out by government or by society at large is irrelevant if the effects are the same.
Having said that, I will also acknowledge that there are some consequences which can occur despite free speech. If you exercise your free speech then there may be societal consequences such as lowering people's opinion of you and perhaps limiting future opportunities. However, such consequences should not be as a result of society trying to punish that person for their speech, excepting in cases where such speech were to violate specific rules of a particular site, to use an example most relevant for the furry fandom."
No no no no no no.
What you are advocating here is completely unrealistic and unworkable. I cannot imagine a world in which a member of the neo Nazis could sue his employer for them firing him after he declared that all Jews were subhuman and threw up a Nazi salute in the middle of his job site, but what you are advocating for would make that a reality. You are looking for a fantasy world ideal of Freedom of Speech. It just doesn't work like that in the real world. There is a very good reason that the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution only applies to government action. Under your position, economic boycotts of businesses that engage in hate speech would be banned. You are advocating for a very specific type of "freedom." You want freedom FROM speech, not freedom of speech. Freedom from speech is a type of freedom where anyone can say what they want and can actively prevent others from reacting to it in any manner that displeases them. It is freedom from criticism and freedom from, as you correctly put it, "consequences." That is a corrupted version of freedom of speech that will never be accepted in modern society.
Freedom of speech means you get to say whatever you want without the government imposing a penalty, with some limitations. You have NO protection against the opinion or actions of non-governmental individuals under "freedom of speech."
"And whether the consequences of free speech are dealt out by government or by society at large is irrelevant if the effects are the same.
Having said that, I will also acknowledge that there are some consequences which can occur despite free speech. If you exercise your free speech then there may be societal consequences such as lowering people's opinion of you and perhaps limiting future opportunities. However, such consequences should not be as a result of society trying to punish that person for their speech, excepting in cases where such speech were to violate specific rules of a particular site, to use an example most relevant for the furry fandom."
No no no no no no.
What you are advocating here is completely unrealistic and unworkable. I cannot imagine a world in which a member of the neo Nazis could sue his employer for them firing him after he declared that all Jews were subhuman and threw up a Nazi salute in the middle of his job site, but what you are advocating for would make that a reality. You are looking for a fantasy world ideal of Freedom of Speech. It just doesn't work like that in the real world. There is a very good reason that the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution only applies to government action. Under your position, economic boycotts of businesses that engage in hate speech would be banned. You are advocating for a very specific type of "freedom." You want freedom FROM speech, not freedom of speech. Freedom from speech is a type of freedom where anyone can say what they want and can actively prevent others from reacting to it in any manner that displeases them. It is freedom from criticism and freedom from, as you correctly put it, "consequences." That is a corrupted version of freedom of speech that will never be accepted in modern society.
Freedom of speech means you get to say whatever you want without the government imposing a penalty, with some limitations. You have NO protection against the opinion or actions of non-governmental individuals under "freedom of speech."