Texas governor signs bill prohibiting social media giants from blocking users based on viewpoint

Exactly. That's the way it SHOULD be. If the owner(s) of those sites CHOOSE to permit whatever, fine. Like you, I am opposed to the government telling a private business owner they are REQUIRED to relax their own terms of use. If you try to go to a store with no shoes or shirt, the owner CAN deny you entry.

And, I don't believe for two seconds that any conservative or Republican that is arguing FOR this overreach would respond that way if all circumstances being equal, it was Biden (or another Democrat or a non-partisan or no party) was fighting for this overreach. Trump needs to get over it. I'm sorry he lost but people tend to get fired when they don't do their jobs properly. If he feels that strongly about it, he should hook up with his BFF Lindell and try to create their own social media site where he can whine until he takes his last breath and his ghost can come back and haunt the White House and all that jazz.

If I owned any social media sites and the government wanted to force this on me, I'd shut it down. Just like our parents told us as kids "My house, my rules. Don't like it, get a job and get or don't get a job and get out." Apparently, Trump's daddy didn't give him that memo.

 

I wrote this in another thread.

Remember those anti-drug commercials showing an egg frying? The voiceover would say "This is your brain on drugs. Don't do drugs."
They'll make a replica of that and show Trump with his tail between his legs and the voiceover will say "This is what happens when your kid doesn't hear the word 'no' until he's in his 70s. Parents teach your kids they won't always get their way (preferably before they're out of diapers and definitely before they are back in them.")

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...fuses-to-resign.589858/page-4#post-1072772548

 

[/QUOTE]

Its very sad how some victims of the liberal party line get suckered into stifling free speech. Worse yet, some liberals seem to feel that stifling free speech is liberty. How far we have fallen.[/QUOTE]

The people doing damage to the first amendment are the ones supporting the Texas law.

Facebook can’t do anything that violates the first amendment, but the State of Texas can, and this will be an easy case for the court. 9-0.

 

Until just recently reviewing this thread, I didn't know that this Post was apparently a response to what I had written earlier about the criminalization / censorship of open debate and honest examination of the holocaust in about 16 "democracies".

Of history's innumerable tragedies, persecutions, and wars, why do you suppose that the holocaust narrative is the only one so fragile and fraudulent that it cannot withstand honest examination and open debate in those 16 democracies?

 

Not sure how I'd feel if that were the case. Not sure how I'd feel if the Martians were invading Hoboken or the Sri Lankans had taken over the Capitol Building in DC either. I'm much better at handling things that actually exist than "what if's". But that's just me.

 

Its very sad how some victims of the liberal party line get suckered into stifling free speech. Worse yet, some liberals seem to feel that stifling free speech is liberty. How far we have fallen.[/QUOTE]

The people doing damage to the first amendment are the ones supporting the Texas law.

Facebook can’t do anything that violates the first amendment, but the State of Texas can, and this will be an easy case for the court. 9-0.[/QUOTE]

See what I mean? Libs actually SUPPORT stifling free speech... wow!

 

Like blacks, or people with disabilities?

 

I would feel confident placing a bet that you would NOT be okay with it.

 

The people doing damage to the first amendment are the ones supporting the Texas law.

Facebook can’t do anything that violates the first amendment, but the State of Texas can, and this will be an easy case for the court. 9-0.[/QUOTE]

See what I mean? Libs actually SUPPORT stifling free speech... wow![/QUOTE]

Clearly we need to start making our Engineers take more history and poli sci classes.

 

See what I mean? Libs actually SUPPORT stifling free speech... wow![/QUOTE]

Clearly we need to start making our Engineers take more history and poli sci classes.[/QUOTE]

Lib support of stifling the First Amendment in this case is right now... right here. No analysis required. Libs want to stifle free speech. This isn't rocket science.

 

They'd be screaming "communism" off the top of their lungs.

Yep. I'd shut it down too if the government started dictating my business model and telling me I have to make my property available for political use.

Remember the outrage when a baker was punished for refusing to bake a cake for gay wedding. IMO, any baker SHOULD have the right to refuse, and conservatives agree with that, but the current day authoritarian republicans are all for this kind of government involvement in how businesses should run themselves.

 

I do remember that. They won't even wear masks, socially distance or get vaccinated but want to dictate what a woman does with her body and private owners can do with their social media websites. Must be nice to be "not for me, but I dictate for thee.". Wow!

 

Looks like Parler is back on line too, and they have a history of banning users who are not Alt-Right. So, Alt-Right has political sites like Parler, GAB and GETTR, but they create laws to attack social media like FaceBook where vast majority of users are not even remotely interested in US politics. I'm beginning to wonder who is trying to silence/cancel who.....

 

You already know the answer to that. I can't say it without getting a mod slap but YOU KNOW! ;-0

 

No.

Social media companies are not publishers. The first amendment gives the right to free speech - not the right to censor others or force others to say things.

If I had a billboard in my yard, I would be a publisher - not a common carrier like the phone company or facebook. As a publisher I would be liable for anything written on my billboard. Facebook and other social media companies claim they are not publishers and don't control what is published. If that is true, anyone should be able to post as long as they are not in violation of the law.

 

Look at all these libs defend unreasoned censorship based on political orientation. WOW... I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it. Its not crazy propaganda... a simple "I like Trump" post and BAM! Your account is cancelled!

 

By the way, its not crazy propaganda... a simple "I like Trump" gets your account cancelled.

Look at all these libs supporting unreasoned censorship... WOW.

 

Nothing anywhere refers to "freedom of cake"... but freedom of speech is well established.

 

LOL. Please, can you at least pretend to be honest. Most my FB contacts are Trump fans and they flooded FB with pro Trump nonsense, and the still haven't stopped. None of them has been banned. Your claim is simply not true, and you know it.

Get honest and stay that way. That's my advice to you.

If you ever read the constitution you will learn it says something about freedom of religion. It also clearly states that 1st amendment is about what CONGRESS can and cannot do, and this has been repeated to you countless times but for some reason it flies a mile over your head.