[mike22223333]

So you are going to justify it like that? These days liberals are falsely using the word liberal. A liberal is a person who supports the law no matter what. Not what your emotions say.

[munchbunny]

A liberal is a person who supports the law no matter what.

That's so wrong it's not even relevant. It's like if you looked up "dog" in the dictionary and the definition was "a leafy plant."

Are you sure you didn't mean a "literal"?

[danharaj]

Where did you get that idea?

[happytoexplain]

My interpretation is the opposite - a lot of events lately provoke critical arguments that use the objective verbiage of legality and human rights to frame emotional, subjective opinions. E.g. the line between a private platform reasonably removing a user or something a user posted for ToS violation, and an attack on free speech. Or the line between reasonably punishing an employee who has violated workplace behavior policies, and an attack on innocence until proven guilty. I would argue that, in this domain of examples, liberals explicitly favor reason and prudence, not extremity toward one side or the other (though there may certainly be cases where there is a general bias toward one side of the line or the other that arguably fails that ideology).

[UncleMeat]

Good to know that these classical liberals would have supported slavery, denying voting rights to women, and jim crow.

That's not really a system that I'd like to follow.