"Live Free Or Die" is a bad state motto. In this essay I will... (TODO)
Syntax... (contradictory; compare "Live Free Or Don't"; imperative mood)
Semantics... (unclear (libre v. gratis), death is bad, and is in fact the greatest
of all evils, contra John Stark's follow-up claim)
Effects... (incl. history, past litigation (Wooley v. Maynard), suicide rates,
influence on whackoes, etc.)
Other... (examples of people finding it offputting (Pearls Before Swine), irony of
being on license plates made by prisoners)

From ChatGPT:

"Live Free Or Die" is the official state motto of New Hampshire. The motto
appears on the state's flag and seal, and is widely recognized as a symbol of the
state's independent spirit and rugged individualism. However, despite its
popularity and widespread use, there are several reasons why "Live Free Or Die"
is a problematic and ultimately bad state motto.

First and foremost, "Live Free Or Die" is a contradictory and confusing phrase.
On its face, the motto seems to suggest that the people of New Hampshire value
freedom above all else, and are willing to die rather than submit to oppression
or tyranny. However, the syntax of the phrase is unclear and potentially
misleading. Does the motto mean that we should live freely and then die, or that
we should live with the expectation of dying? The phrase is ambiguous and could
be interpreted in different ways, which undermines its intended message and
effectiveness as a motto.

Another issue with "Live Free Or Die" is its semantics. The English language
does not have a clear distinction between "free" and "gratis", which can lead
to misunderstandings and confusion. In some cases, "free" can refer to something
that is without cost or obligation, while in others it can refer to something that
is unrestricted or unfettered. This ambiguity is compounded when the motto is
translated into other languages that do have a distinction between "free" and
"gratis". For example, in Spanish, "libre" and "gratis" are two separate words
with distinct meanings, and translating "Live Free Or Die" directly could lead
to confusion or misinterpretation.

Furthermore, "Live Free Or Die" has had some negative effects on the state of
New Hampshire and its people. One notable example is the high rate of suicide in
the state. According to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

(it stopped there)

More from ChatGPT:

Wooley v. Maynard was a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1977.
The case involved a challenge to a New Hampshire law that required all vehicles
registered in the state to display the state motto, "Live Free Or Die", on their
license plates. The plaintiffs in the case, George and Maxine Maynard, were devout
Jehovah's Witnesses who objected to the motto on religious grounds, arguing that
it violated their freedom of speech and freedom of conscience.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Maynards, finding that the law requiring
the display of the state motto on license plates violated the First Amendment to
the United States Constitution. In its ruling, the Court held that the Maynards'
license plates were a form of personal expression, and that the state's requirement
that they display the state motto was a form of compelled speech that infringed on
their right to freedom of speech. The Court further held that the state's interest
in promoting its motto was not sufficient to justify this infringement, and that
the Maynards' religious beliefs were a valid reason to exempt them from the
requirement to display the state motto on their license plates.

The decision in Wooley v. Maynard was significant because it affirmed the principle
that the government cannot force individuals to express views or beliefs that they
do not hold. It also established that the government cannot require individuals to
participate in the promotion of a particular message, even if that message is
widely accepted or considered to be important. The case has been cited in
subsequent legal challenges to laws and policies that require individuals to
express views or beliefs that they do not hold, and has helped to reinforce the
importance of freedom of speech and freedom of conscience in American law.
