Is Free Speech Under Attack in this Country?

Garmel said:
DeSantis isn't putting up with this ****.

[tw]1556641379438080000[/tw]
Click to expand...

Brilliant - For those that don't understand that this is the governments only purpose (protect lives and liberty of its citizens) then you are going to be very dissatisfied with the next 20+ years of governance.
 
thethe said:
Brilliant - For those that don't understand that this is the governments only purpose (protect lives and liberty of its citizens) then you are going to be very dissatisfied with the next 20+ years of governance.
Click to expand...

Unless you’re gay and want a wedding cake, right?
 
sturg33 said:
To be clear... You did support the cake nonsense but you don't support the PayPal stuff, is that accurate?
Click to expand...

I actually don’t know how I feel about the PayPal stuff. I don’t necessarily think political opinions need to be protected from scrutiny and think that can extend to being banned from certain services. However, I think PayPal and other financial institutions/services are so necessary to function in society that it’s not right to restrict the use of them unless there is evidence of criminal activity being taken, so I’d disagree with PayPal’s actions. I think the real question is the extent to which the government can or should take action given that one’s political views doesn’t constitute a protected class. I don’t think it’s tyranny for DeSantis to do this, but do wonder what the line is. I also have my doubts that DeSantis would keep that same line for those he doesn’t align with politically. These are important questions that I would hope the critical thinkers would be worried about as well.
 
Tapate50 said:
Trudeau and GoFundMe say hi
Click to expand...

Yeah, but I think that one was actually more objectively wrong. I definitely don’t think the government should force businesses *not* to do legal business with their customers. Where it gets grayer are these cases where it’s a question of the liberty of the business vs. the liberty of the consumer.
 
https://www.nber.org/papers/w30352#fromrss

To what extent is U.S. state tax policy affected by corporate political contributions? The 2010 Supreme Court Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling provides an exogenous shock to corporate campaign spending, allowing corporations to spend on elections in 23 states which previously had spending bans. Ten years after the ruling and for a wide range of outcomes, we are not able to identify economically or statistically significant effects of corporate independent expenditures on state tax policy, including tax rates, discretionary tax breaks, and tax revenues.


 
I had never heard of this person til yesterday when people were saying he was banned from social media platforms.

This is the first and only clip I've ever seen of him.

And it's quite clear why the system felt he had to be silenced

The seals clap!

[Tw]1561338899632427008[/tw]
 
My favorite genre of conservative victimhood is using a social media platform to complain about how social media platform is silencing them.
 
mqt said:
My favorite genre of conservative victimhood is using a social media platform to complain about how social media platform is silencing them.
Click to expand...

You will eventually get silenced if you speak against the narrative. The fact that you can't see it or don't want to see it doesn't change anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top