| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,22 @@ |
|
1 |
+Part 1 is Framework |
|
2 |
+ |
|
3 |
+Same framework as before. |
|
4 |
+ |
|
5 |
+Part 2 is the Offense |
|
6 |
+ |
|
7 |
+analytic |
|
8 |
+ |
|
9 |
+Second, speech is key to maintain the omnilateral will. Free speech used to criticize public authority is representative of how to fix reciprocal constraints of freedom within the will. Varden 1 |
|
10 |
+ |
|
11 |
+It would be ... and their state. |
|
12 |
+ |
|
13 |
+Third, it is a contradiction in the will and to the omnilateral will representing the will to provide restrictions of free rights. Varden 2 |
|
14 |
+ |
|
15 |
+There is clear ... of the people |
|
16 |
+ |
|
17 |
+Fourth, listening to free speech is an internal choice, which means that it cannot be coercively enforced. Words have no ability to coerce someone meaning it’s a contradiction in the will to restrict free speech and hindering a hindrance isn’t justified. Varden 3 |
|
18 |
+ |
|
19 |
+Internal freedom requires ... view of right. |
|
20 |
+ |
|
21 |
+Fifth, Engaging in the sphere of public education is uniquely key. It constitutes state action and as such maintains the structure of the will. Dagger et al 14 |
|
22 |
+The second line ... of consent theory. |