NBA legend John Stockton sues Washington AG, medical commission for allegedly stifling doctors' free

No they haven’t. Disagreement is not censorship.

 

yep, speech one disagrees with is why the 1st exists

 

they tried to outlaw talking about birth control, saying it was obscene, there were many obscenity laws the right tried to use to force their "religious" morality on others

I do not forget Trump used the same back doors the left did to censor posts

personally, I do not even think Facebook\twitter\etc and other social media should be forced to take an alleged murder's profile down, make it read only, preserve the data, that is it

 

When was discussion of birth control attempted to be censored/outlawed? What morality laws?

How did Trump attempt to censor posts?

I agree that Facebook should never censor posts unless those posts are being used to commit or organize criminal activity. Facebook et. al. have used the protection of 230B which protects them from prosecution from posted content to actively censoring content. That is not what 230B allows.

 

And there is an equal moral and ethical duty to bar misinformation

The sad part is that few have the training to winnow the chaff from the wheat. Look at the vaccination misinformation. We have used vaccines for centuries and yet we still have people who have been misled by the misinformers

 

Anti vaccination twaddle to my mind IS an organised crime

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30053-0/abstract

 

The government limited medical experts speech who disagreed with them. This wasn’t an infomercial. Try and catch up with the rest of us please

 

Who are the outsiders you’re speaking of? School is a function of government. If it’s a function of government then the government saying what books should be in school would not fall under an outsider

 

It's up to the individual to make that decision. There are adverse effect risks to all vaccinations.

 

You are entitled to your opinion. There is risk involved with any vaccination. If a person is at extremely low risk to covid for example why risk serious adverse effects of vaccination? A person in Australia was awarded a settlement by a court because he was forced to be vaccinated by his employer.

 

I was all set to throw out my glasses because I saw where you can cure myopia with simple exercises.

 

Ivermectin has been shown to be effective in treating covid as has hydroxychloroquine. Neither are a cure.

 

It’s not a ban…. You can still go buy every book they banned. Wow… they’re still accessible? Yes. So they’re not banned after all. Amazing

 

Love the pun but I believe he is correct. Why are the left being so hostile to discussion? If the truth and science is correct then people won’t listen to them.

 

I buy books for my kids all the time if I want them to research something

 

The idea of a school library is to provide free access to literature. Some people don't have it in their budget to buy To Kill a Mockingbird or Charlotte's Web.

 

If you can’t afford charlottes Web for your kid something is wrong. Seriously wrong. I’m sorry but any job worming 1 hour will buy that book. That’s a pathetic claim.

 

Most libraries provide digital access to books as well.

 

Do you know what's pathetic? A state banning the book because talking animals is deemed blasphemous and unnatural. As for not being able to afford the book - we keep reading about how bad things are financially. How people can't afford to pay bills and feed their families. But the idea that someone cannot afford to buy their child a book (that should be available in their school library) is pathetic?

 

It is pathetic. And I believe it only happened in Kansas. If this happened in my state I would just buy it to have on my shelf so any of my kids could read it if they chose. It’s not banned is my point. It’s just not provided for free is all. They still have free speech.

 

First, your "whataboutism" play fails.
Second, your claim is untrue.
Third, can you show where the right has tried to gag the president?
Gag medical doctors that disagree with some of the Covid practices?
Forced Biden off the ballot no matter what, even though a significant percentage of the population wants to vote for him?
Dragged a gold star father (Steve Nikoui) from the House gallery because he shouted “Abbey Gate!,” while Democrats on the house floor repeatedly shouted "FOUR MORE YEARS" without so much as a glare from the sergeant at arms?

 

A "discussion" presumes some level of reality and an acceptance of a common set of facts.

When one of the COVID CONSPIRACISTS brings those to the table, a "discussion" can be had.

BUT

Claiming that vaccines are Bill Gates' secret plan to inject everyone with nanites?
That's just a very bad science fiction movie that even SyFy would reject and, therefore, not a basis for discussion.

 

they were called the Comstock laws

"Republicans want to use a 150-year-old law to ban abortion nationwide" February 13, 2024

https://iowastartingline.com/2024/0...-150-year-old-law-to-ban-abortion-nationwide/

"The Comstock laws are a set of regulations that criminalized “obscene” materials over 150 years ago. "

 

show me where a dem President did what Trump did when he lost

 

There was legitimate concerns and alternate forms of treatment presented by doctors that were being silenced and also actively silenced by the government.

ivermectin Does actually work and I have seen people take it after being diagnosed with COVID and their symptoms improve. I know people call it horse dewormer but I’m talking about the real thing designed for human consumption, not horse dewormer.