Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, define "endorsement". Permitting something to exist when you have the power to do otherwise is a mild form of endorsement. A commitment to free speech is, to an extent, an endorsement of all the speech that results.
> A commitment to free speech is, to an extent, an endorsement of all the speech that results. Absolutely not. I'd argue that anyone should be free to talk with others about their opinion, but that doesn't mean I agree with that opinion. And letting then speak without shutting them down doesn't mean I agree either, just means I agree that they should be able to speak freely. What kind of dystopian viewpoint is that?…
Sure, when “talking” is done via sound waves or someone else’s medium it’s different
But if you have free-speech parties at your place and people spray paint messages on your house then you are now “hosting”
You decide which words you leave or paint over