What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis To Sign Bill Banning Social Media ‘Deplatforming’

colfax_m

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
27,503
Reaction score
9,579
Points
465
When companies engage in biased censorship and discrimination, that’s Exactly what the government is for and rightful to step in
Nope. No constitutional authority to do so.
 

dblack

Platinum Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
39,529
Reaction score
6,213
Points
1,130
When companies engage in biased censorship and discrimination, that’s Exactly what the government is for and rightful to step in.
Nope. That's exactly the opposite of what government is for. Discrimination laws are bogus. The government is there to protect our rights, not to force people to accommodate each other against their will.
 
Last edited:

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
32,238
Reaction score
16,009
Points
1,600
Location
Tejas
When companies engage in biased censorship and discrimination, that’s Exactly what the government is for and rightful to step in.
Nope. That's exactly the opposite of what government is for. Discrimination laws is bogus. The government is there to protect our rights, not to force people to accommodate each other against their will.
I agree with the principle, but the government already does that shit.

Get rid of all PA laws and I am on board. Otherwise, fuck it. It's time PA laws worked in our favor....FOR FUCKING ONCE EVER!!!
 

dblack

Platinum Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
39,529
Reaction score
6,213
Points
1,130
When companies engage in biased censorship and discrimination, that’s Exactly what the government is for and rightful to step in.
Nope. That's exactly the opposite of what government is for. Discrimination laws is bogus. The government is there to protect our rights, not to force people to accommodate each other against their will.
I agree with the principle, but the government already does that shit.

Get rid of all PA laws and I am on board. Otherwise, fuck it. It's time PA laws worked in our favor....FOR FUCKING ONCE EVER!!!

That makes total sense. We should embrace socialism, police brutality, and corruption while we're at it - and learn to work them in our favor!
 

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
32,238
Reaction score
16,009
Points
1,600
Location
Tejas
When companies engage in biased censorship and discrimination, that’s Exactly what the government is for and rightful to step in.
Nope. That's exactly the opposite of what government is for. Discrimination laws is bogus. The government is there to protect our rights, not to force people to accommodate each other against their will.
I agree with the principle, but the government already does that shit.

Get rid of all PA laws and I am on board. Otherwise, fuck it. It's time PA laws worked in our favor....FOR FUCKING ONCE EVER!!!

That makes total sense. We should embrace socialism, police brutality, and corruption while we're at it - and learn to work them in our favor!
Hey man, I know what you're saying. It pisses me off that I have to sacrifice principles over practicality, but unless we start a fucking war, being principled is getting us NOWHERE!!! That's why Trump was so fucking popular. Principles got us a big juicy dick up the ass. Trump was the backlash.

What's your solution to that?
 

dblack

Platinum Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
39,529
Reaction score
6,213
Points
1,130
When companies engage in biased censorship and discrimination, that’s Exactly what the government is for and rightful to step in.
Nope. That's exactly the opposite of what government is for. Discrimination laws is bogus. The government is there to protect our rights, not to force people to accommodate each other against their will.
I agree with the principle, but the government already does that shit.

Get rid of all PA laws and I am on board. Otherwise, fuck it. It's time PA laws worked in our favor....FOR FUCKING ONCE EVER!!!

That makes total sense. We should embrace socialism, police brutality, and corruption while we're at it - and learn to work them in our favor!
Hey man, I know what you're saying. It pisses me off that I have to sacrifice principles over practicality, but unless we start a fucking war, being principled is getting us NOWHERE!!! What's your solution to that?

Keep fighting. Keep making the case for freedom in a sane, rational way. "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" is no better than giving up. Arguably, it's worse.
 

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
32,238
Reaction score
16,009
Points
1,600
Location
Tejas
When companies engage in biased censorship and discrimination, that’s Exactly what the government is for and rightful to step in.
Nope. That's exactly the opposite of what government is for. Discrimination laws is bogus. The government is there to protect our rights, not to force people to accommodate each other against their will.
I agree with the principle, but the government already does that shit.

Get rid of all PA laws and I am on board. Otherwise, fuck it. It's time PA laws worked in our favor....FOR FUCKING ONCE EVER!!!

That makes total sense. We should embrace socialism, police brutality, and corruption while we're at it - and learn to work them in our favor!
Hey man, I know what you're saying. It pisses me off that I have to sacrifice principles over practicality, but unless we start a fucking war, being principled is getting us NOWHERE!!! What's your solution to that?

Keep fighting. Keep making the case for freedom in a sane, rational way. "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" is no better than giving up. Arguably, it's worse.
It feels like it's just 3 or 4 of us are swimming against a cargo ship. I'm getting tired. Until more people embrace liberty, the ship will plow ahead.

Is war the only real option at this point?
 

dblack

Platinum Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
39,529
Reaction score
6,213
Points
1,130
When companies engage in biased censorship and discrimination, that’s Exactly what the government is for and rightful to step in.
Nope. That's exactly the opposite of what government is for. Discrimination laws is bogus. The government is there to protect our rights, not to force people to accommodate each other against their will.
I agree with the principle, but the government already does that shit.

Get rid of all PA laws and I am on board. Otherwise, fuck it. It's time PA laws worked in our favor....FOR FUCKING ONCE EVER!!!

That makes total sense. We should embrace socialism, police brutality, and corruption while we're at it - and learn to work them in our favor!
Hey man, I know what you're saying. It pisses me off that I have to sacrifice principles over practicality, but unless we start a fucking war, being principled is getting us NOWHERE!!! What's your solution to that?

Keep fighting. Keep making the case for freedom in a sane, rational way. "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" is no better than giving up. Arguably, it's worse.
It feels like it's just 3 or 4 of us are swimming against a cargo ship. I'm getting tired. Until more people embrace liberty, the ship will plow ahead.

Is war the only real option at this point?

War is not an option. If we can't get more than 5% support in elections, we're not going to win a war.

Are you a sci-fi fan? Did you ever read the Foundation series?
 

dblack

Platinum Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
39,529
Reaction score
6,213
Points
1,130
Are you a sci-fi fan? Did you ever read the Foundation series?
No. Who's it by?

Asimov. It posits a large, interstellar empire in decline. A prominent "pscho-historian" determines that a complete collapse is inevitable and will result in a 30,000 year "dark age". So, he concocts a plan to save civilization and reduce the "dark age" period to 1000 years instead. That may be the best we can do.

Did you read the Sword of Truth series by Terry Goodkind?

No.
 
Last edited:

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
32,238
Reaction score
16,009
Points
1,600
Location
Tejas
Are you a sci-fi fan? Did you ever read the Foundation series?
No. Who's it by?

Asimov. It posits are large, interstellar empire in decline. A prominent "pscho-historian" determines that a complete collapse is inevitable and will result in a 30,000 year "dark age". So, he concocts a plan to save civilization and reduce the "dark age" period to 1000 years instead. That may be the best we can do.

Did you read the Sword of Truth series by Terry Goodkind?

No.
Looking into it.

This?




Terry Goodkind was somewhat of an Ayn Rand protégé.

 

Kevin_Kennedy

Defend Liberty
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Messages
18,330
Reaction score
1,710
Points
205
republicans strike again. Now they are taking first amendment rights from social media.

They are regulating the internet. And violating the first amendment to do it. They are also violating section 230 of the communications decency act.

What happened to their screaming that business owners have the right to decide who they serve or do business with? That was a lie too.

They are showing that their hate for regulations was all a lie. They love regulating business just not in a responsible way.

Their beliefs are of convenience not real beliefs.

Fair enough point, though I might dispute that these companies are making entirely private decisions on whom to ban from their platforms when they’re constantly threatened with regulatory interference by Congress. Regardless, in a similar vein, when did Democrats suddenly find the rights of big corporations to do whatever they want with their property to be sacrosanct?
 

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
32,238
Reaction score
16,009
Points
1,600
Location
Tejas
republicans strike again. Now they are taking first amendment rights from social media.

They are regulating the internet. And violating the first amendment to do it. They are also violating section 230 of the communications decency act.

What happened to their screaming that business owners have the right to decide who they serve or do business with? That was a lie too.

They are showing that their hate for regulations was all a lie. They love regulating business just not in a responsible way.

Their beliefs are of convenience not real beliefs.

Fair enough point, though I might dispute that these companies are making entirely private decisions on whom to ban from their platforms when they’re constantly threatened with regulatory interference by Congress. Regardless, in a similar vein, when did Democrats suddenly find the rights of big corporations to do whatever they want with their property to be sacrosanct?
That's my concern, and such would be considered government action. But, how do you prove it? dblack has a point there.

The lack of transparency means we probably will never prove it.
 

dblack

Platinum Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
39,529
Reaction score
6,213
Points
1,130
republicans strike again. Now they are taking first amendment rights from social media.

They are regulating the internet. And violating the first amendment to do it. They are also violating section 230 of the communications decency act.

What happened to their screaming that business owners have the right to decide who they serve or do business with? That was a lie too.

They are showing that their hate for regulations was all a lie. They love regulating business just not in a responsible way.

Their beliefs are of convenience not real beliefs.

Fair enough point, though I might dispute that these companies are making entirely private decisions on whom to ban from their platforms when they’re constantly threatened with regulatory interference by Congress. Regardless, in a similar vein, when did Democrats suddenly find the rights of big corporations to do whatever they want with their property to be sacrosanct?
"It's different when we do it" - said pretty much every Democrat and Republican.
 

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
32,238
Reaction score
16,009
Points
1,600
Location
Tejas
republicans strike again. Now they are taking first amendment rights from social media.

They are regulating the internet. And violating the first amendment to do it. They are also violating section 230 of the communications decency act.

What happened to their screaming that business owners have the right to decide who they serve or do business with? That was a lie too.

They are showing that their hate for regulations was all a lie. They love regulating business just not in a responsible way.

Their beliefs are of convenience not real beliefs.

Fair enough point, though I might dispute that these companies are making entirely private decisions on whom to ban from their platforms when they’re constantly threatened with regulatory interference by Congress. Regardless, in a similar vein, when did Democrats suddenly find the rights of big corporations to do whatever they want with their property to be sacrosanct?
"It's different when we do it" - said pretty much every Democrat and Republican.
I suppose it's easier to support liberty when it's not being used against you.
:dunno:

Sometimes is sucks having principles.
 

MarcATL

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
30,624
Reaction score
10,508
Points
1,400
republicans strike again. Now they are taking first amendment rights from social media.

They are regulating the internet. And violating the first amendment to do it. They are also violating section 230 of the communications decency act.

What happened to their screaming that business owners have the right to decide who they serve or do business with? That was a lie too.

They are showing that their hate for regulations was all a lie. They love regulating business just not in a responsible way.

Their beliefs are of convenience not real beliefs.

If Republicans didn't LIE, they'd have NOTHING to say!
 

Eric Arthur Blair

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2015
Messages
21,664
Reaction score
12,034
Points
1,415
Fair enough point, though I might dispute that these companies are making entirely private decisions on whom to ban from their platforms when they’re constantly threatened with regulatory interference by Congress. Regardless, in a similar vein, when did Democrats suddenly find the rights of big corporations to do whatever they want with their property to be sacrosanct?
When it suited their purposes so well.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$505.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top