WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2024 Poal.co

395

(post is archived)

[–] 0 pt

There are more tactful ways to tacitly admit the logical fallacy present in the meme, but I still accept yours.

[–] 0 pt

To simplify, the left is really good at gaslighting.

[–] 0 pt

So government "representatives" inciting is totally fine at smaller scales? NBD?

Big Tech doesn't see it that way. They support and promote leftwing violence while silencing conservative speech. That's their double standard. Wtf is your double standard worth?

[–] 1 pt

“The threats Rep. Johnson has received are appalling, ugly and deeply disturbing, but her response to those messages is also unacceptable and I strongly condemn both,” [Michigan Attorney General] Nessel said.

“As Michiganders, and as Americans, we cannot allow hateful rhetoric from a few individuals to drag the masses down into a spiral of unjust actions,” Nessel continued. “It is never acceptable for anyone – especially a public servant – to incite violence or to threaten others with harm.”

This is more along the lines of an appropriate response. As a side note, she lost her committee seats. In my opinion, they should have removed her entirely from the body. Certainly they would have were there a direct reaction resulting in death.

To be frank, reach and stature does matter, in my opinion. I expect more from the President and his cabinet than I do a Senator, and far more from the latter compared to a District Representative, even on the federal level.

Once we get into ‘big tech’ censoring, that’s a big can of worms.

[–] 0 pt

I agree. I don't believe that sites with majority user-generated content can be permitted to remove or reduce the spread of lawful content without liability. Plugins and third party software can allow social media users to filter their own information.

The only censorship that's rightful and essential is "I'm not listening to you." It has to be individual-level controls. forcing someone to listen to something is just as bad as preventing them from hearing something. The founding fathers could not have possibly foreseen that freedom of speech protections would also need freedom of reach protections.