You flagged a post, that says exactly what you were trying to do. Either way you were shrieking over a couple of words, you are as bad as the people going at Adams here and the āPC brigadeā which youāve hilariously tried to come off as someone railing against.
As always with the left, you believe in stuff like free speech when it suits you.
Here we go with the āleftā again 
It will be far left, loony left and far, far extremist left in a few postsā¦
Iām glad that post about calling transsexuals nut jobs has really stuck with you, you god bothering cunt.
Iāve flagged this disgusting post for religious persecution. Shame on you pal.
Do you know the way youāve said youāve flagged the postā¦ does that mean youāve really, really flagged it?
Yes.
I think you forgot a Tuborg reference there, mate.
It doesnāt mean I donāt still love you pal.
If our e-relationship is ok, then iām ok.
You seem upset, maybe you should flag my post and go back to your safe space.
Do you believe in absolute free speech, pal?
Upset? What makes you think that? I gave you two of my best happy emojis.
Good to see the blueshirts and the MSM all hopping over Jarry.
Obviously they all called for the head of enda the racist as well
Whatās your angle here? The blasphemy laws, slander, child pornā¦?
You are going through all my posts with a comb today to try and get into an argument where you can copy and paste Slate/Salon ect articles.
Itās a very simple question, Tim.
Do you believe in absolute free speech?
Your previous posts would strongly imply that you do, but Iām willing to let you clarify your stance.
Canāt say fairer than that.
Do you think itās acceptable for black people to use it?
Do you think any songs containing that word should be banned?
Do you think any films containing that word should be banned?
Iām asking you what rabbit hole you want to go down. I donāt believe people should be censored for expressing ideas or mere empty words.
You want to drag me into an argument about child porn, the Irish blasphemy laws ect. Your game is boring and tedious at this stage.
My idea of freedom of speech is close to the 1st Amendment of the US. Flagging posts with some empty words as it challenges your established viewpoints I donāt agree with. When the same person tries to laugh at the āPC brigadeā, you have to point out that hypocrisy.
Iāve nothing really more to add to that. You can go ahead and start googling to try and take the argument elsewhere.
I think I was just racist there earlier. Some Chinese fella at the til in front of me left his keys on the counter. I ran after him and shouted āHai, you left your keys behindā.
I donāt want to go down any rabbit hole, Tim. Iām trying to get beyond your rhetorical bluster and ascertain whether you actually believe there are limits to free speech, or not.
The question was a simple one - āDo you believe in absolute free speech?ā
Given that you mention the US 1st Amendment, Iāll take it that the answer is āNoā - you donāt believe in an absolute right to free speech (neither do I, for the record).
So, given that you believe there is a clear line that must be drawn in terms of free speech rights, itās clear you only believe in free speech when it suits, because if you didnāt youād believe in an absolute right to free speech, which means literally anything is fair game.
Iām not quite sure how you square that with your absolutist statement āEither you believe in free speech or not.ā
But it is interesting that you accuse others of only believing in free speech when it suits, when thatās exactly what you yourself believe inā¦
You, donāt forget, are the one telling somebody else to āstfuā (shut the fuck up) on this thread. Free speech, eh?
Do learn the difference between firmly arguing a point and denial of free speech, please. Itās a point that could equally be applied to some other conservative reactionary posters here.
What I prefer is the former, within existing laws - it would appear what you and others like you prefer is the latter, based on, ooh, whatever you donāt like.