Mac-7
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2019
- 69,734
- 50,420
- 3,565
At this point FaceBook bullying doesnt feel any worse than government bullyingMost people want to use the government to bully others. Doesn't mean we should give in to them.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
At this point FaceBook bullying doesnt feel any worse than government bullyingMost people want to use the government to bully others. Doesn't mean we should give in to them.
I am not telling FaceBook what to doBut the thing is, the legal precedent of government dictating to the media will last much longer than Facebook or your current need for revenge.
LOL - except for the guns and police and stuff.At this point FaceBook bullying doesnt feel any worse than government bullyingMost people want to use the government to bully others. Doesn't mean we should give in to them.
?LOL - except for the guns and police and stuff.Most people want to use the government to bully others. Doesn't mean we should give in to them.
At this point FaceBook bullying doesnt feel any worse than government bullying
Facebook isn’t bullying anyone. Desantis is.At this point FaceBook bullying doesnt feel any worse than government bullying
Facebook has no need to work for your interests. No one does.Since FaceBook is working against my interests now I think it would be a step on the right direction
True and I have no reason to give them immunity from lawsuits eitherFacebook has no need to work for your interests. No one does.
Originally you said you wanted a "level playing field". But now you've admitted it's just about getting back at the websites who banned Trump. I'm all for repealing 230, but doing so won't achieve either of these goals.I am not telling FaceBook what to doBut the thing is, the legal precedent of government dictating to the media will last much longer than Facebook or your current need for revenge.
But I do want to take special protections away from them since they clearly favor only one side of the issues
Ah, so it’s a quid pro quo you’re after then.True and I have no reason to give them immunity from lawsuits either
You don't understand the difference between a business and government. Hint: guns, laws and police. One has them, the other doesn't.?LOL - except for the guns and police and stuff.Most people want to use the government to bully others. Doesn't mean we should give in to them.
At this point FaceBook bullying doesnt feel any worse than government bullying
LOLLiberals are so frail that differing opinions have to be fakely labeled as “lie” so that some bizarre justification can be extruded to remove the opinion from sight or sound and libbies can curl up in their safe space.
Breathtaking isn’t it? Full force of law or a ban from a website. What’s the difference anyway?You don't understand the difference between a business and government. Hint: guns, laws and police. One has them, the other doesn't.?LOL - except for the guns and police and stuff.Most people want to use the government to bully others. Doesn't mean we should give in to them.
At this point FaceBook bullying doesnt feel any worse than government bullying
Facebook is doing no such thing.I share your concerns over private property interests, but this case is different. Facebook is clearly acting by proxy for the Federal Government so the FedGov can "legally" censor free speech. Facebook is acting as FedGov's agent. It wasn't government action, so nobody can complain about government action, right?So, it's just retribution?It might nothow would that achieve your goal of a "level playing field"?
But if not we would be no worse off than we are now with liberal censorship of conservative speech
and FaceBook would be subject to lawsuits from both sides
It's akin to 3rd-party thugs to beat a confession out of a suspect, and the police just happened to be listening in.
Sure, to protect the public from discrimination. Conservative is not a protected class. Twitter and Facebook aren't the only services.In the real world private businesses can be and almost always are constrained by government in a variety of waysIt doesn't apply to private businesses
They're not censoring conservatives. I know conservatives who are still on facebook.Obviously not everyone agrees that FaceBook should be free to censor conservativesfor everyone to decide. Everyone has the right to say no.
The country isn't here to serve you.So, it's just retribution?It might nothow would that achieve your goal of a "level playing field"?
But if not we would be no worse off than we are now with liberal censorship of conservative speech
and FaceBook would be subject to lawsuits from both sides
Since FaceBook is working against my interests now I think it would be a step on the right direction
Why not? Why should someone be protected from discrimination based on their religious beliefs, but not their political beliefs?Conservative is not a protected class.
thats the goalOriginally you said you wanted a "level playing field".
see post #998Ah, so it’s a quid pro quo you’re after then.True and I have no reason to give them immunity from lawsuits either
thats the goalOriginally you said you wanted a "level playing field".
but failing that I will settle for punishing FaceBook and suppressing liberal opinions along with conservatives