Coronavirus (political)

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by MTK

How nuts is it that we have to fact check the President

President threatens to close social media platforms after accusing Twitter of ‘stifling free speech’ for correcting his post

Hard to have a "Dictatorship" if everyone is questioning you and lives.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by MTK

How nuts is it that we have to fact check the President

President threatens to close social media platforms after accusing Twitter of ‘stifling free speech’ for correcting his post

Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech............. Benjamin Franklin .

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by MTK

How nuts is it that we have to fact check the President

President threatens to close social media platforms after accusing Twitter of ‘stifling free speech’ for correcting his post

He erodes the standards of the Office of the President to which we've grown accustomed. He doesn't live up to some very basic minimum standards and too many Americans are too poorly versed in civics to recognize it.

[SolidSnake84]

Well, my take on this, not being a Trump supporter, is that even lying is still "free speech", so if any company, Facebook, Twitter, or whomever is stifling that speech, that is probably not a good thing.

I also don't think that a private company should be the one who is deciding if information is true or false. I think its censorship either way you look at it, and that itself, IMO, is not good.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by SolidSnake84

Well, my take on this, not being a Trump supporter, is that even lying is still "free speech", so if any company, Facebook, Twitter, or whomever is stifling that speech, that is probably not a good thing.

I also don't think that a private company should be the one who is deciding if information is true or false. I think its censorship either way you look at it, and that itself, IMO, is not good.

The key part of your sentence is in bold above.

This is no different than a Christian bakery refusing to make a cake for a gay wedding.

When you sign up to use their platform, you agree to use it by their rules. If it was a government office putting limits on Trump's free speech, then we'd have an issue.

[MTK]

^ yup

And it's important to note that fact checking is not censoring. None of this posts have been deleted or altered.

[SunnySide]

Originally Posted by mooby

The key part of your sentence is in bold above.

This is no different than a Christian bakery refusing to make a cake for a gay wedding.

When you sign up to use their platform, you agree to use it by their rules. If it was a government office putting limits on Trump's free speech, then we'd have an issue.

Its a bit for complicated imo.

A bakery or a hotel is "open to the public" and under interstate commerce clause and civil rights laws, a store "open to the general public" cannot discriminate or deny service based on race, religion, gender etc. A bakery open to the public is clearly subject to federal laws and regulations regarding constitutional rights. (whether "sexual identity" is a protected class is up for debate and how that parlays with religious freedom is the difficult issue with the bakery cases)

Twitter - what the hell is it? Its obviously not a brick and mortar motel in Florida. Perhaps it could be regulated if it is considered a publicly necessary utility like railroads were back in the day or like energy or water etc.

Just a few years ago, the FCC labeled the "internet" as a public utility and thus subject to federal regulations. Without reading up on it, i think they really wanted to regulate the wires/towers etc i.e. the ability to provide internet.

I just dont see how "twitter" can be considered a public utility. Posting your thoughts arent vital and necessary to society. There are many other platforms to post your thoughts so its not like this is a monopoly as compared to Cox/verizon owning all the fiber cables in a certain part of the country.

----------------------

Twitter can do what ever it wants and thinks is in the best interest of its company and shareholders, imo.

[Chico23231]

First, Trump actions against social media I’m against.

I believe twitter should either fact check everyone who qualifies followers-wise equally or not at all. As far as Facebook then, we are all happy with that as well?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by SolidSnake84

Well, my take on this, not being a Trump supporter, is that even lying is still "free speech", so if any company, Facebook, Twitter, or whomever is stifling that speech, that is probably not a good thing.

I also don't think that a private company should be the one who is deciding if information is true or false. I think its censorship either way you look at it, and that itself, IMO, is not good.

It's not a free speech violation unless the government is the one suppressing the speech. Twitter cannot suppress anybody's right to free speech, but they can tell you what they're willing to accept on their platform.

If you don't like their terms, it's not a violation of your freedoms because of this simple fact: you are entirely free to start your own social media platform and say whatever you want.

[sdskinsfan2001]

Facebook, Twitter, IG etc. are all based in the bay area/silicon valley. The liberal echo chamber capital of the country. So if you're a conservative and you choose to use those apps, you're doing that in full acceptance of that knowledge. So there is no point in complaining about it. I haven't read what exactly is in Trumps executive order but in general more government is a negative to me, so I'm most likely against it.

If conservatives feel they're getting censored or what not, then stop using it. If millions of people stop using them that's how you effect change how it should be done. $$$ controls everything.

In general, I hope people of all parties aren't using social media as the basis for their views anyways.

[Buffalo Bob]

Originally Posted by SunnySide

Its a bit for complicated imo.

A bakery or a hotel is "open to the public" and under interstate commerce clause and civil rights laws, a store "open to the general public" cannot discriminate or deny service based on race, religion, gender etc. A bakery open to the public is clearly subject to federal laws and regulations regarding constitutional rights. (whether "sexual identity" is a protected class is up for debate and how that parlays with religious freedom is the difficult issue with the bakery cases)

.

I agree with the Christian bakery because it was a custom specialty item. I also believe the gay couple singled them out, knowing full well they would be denied.

When I lived in California I had a lesbian couple who were close friends. They pretty much knew what local businesses were owned by gay people. I am sure that gay couple in Colorado could have easily found a gay friendly bakery.

I personally refused someone service based on their beliefs a couple decades ago in California. A guy handed me a concept drawing of a custom truck grille ornament. He asked how much to make him one. It wasn't hard to notice it had a pair of swastikas on it. My response to him wasn't pleasant.

They way I look at it I did the same thing as the Christian bakery. I refused to make someone a specialty item, because I disagreed with their beliefs. Of course I don't think any court in the land would award damages to a Nazi.

[SunnySide]

Bob - I agree with you. So does constitutional case law (at least 20 years ago when I studied con law)

Specially designed requests that call into question a persons skill or artistic ability is protected from being forced to accept or deny a request. The baker case, I sympathize with that baker because he offered them any one of his stock shelf cakes that were not personally designed. I’m a supporter of gay and lesbian rights but here, in this case, I sided with the baker.

—————-

If you do iron work, I think there is a nice business niche of custom making outdoor Argentine type grills. My rich brother paid a guy close to 5k for a custom made grill, I think he had to go out of state to find anyone who did custom iron grill work.

Put some signs up around Potomac Maryland and rich dudes will pay you rich people money. Custom grills are becoming a rich guy trend imo.

[Buffalo Bob]

I am a machinist, the grilles you speak of would be made by a fabricating shop. I specialize in smaller items from parts that would go inside a watch to maybe something as big as a football. This guy just wanted something that would attach to a vehicle grille.

On another sports fan forum I no longer go to the gay wedding cake incident was discussed at length. I don't know if it was the mostly left leaning members or the fact it was for fans of a team based in San Francisco, but I had almost no one agree with my position. Either the baker and I are both right or both wrong, I don't see how a person could disagree with that.

That case had to get all the way to the supreme court before the baker finally prevailed. I am not religious, but I was brought up around some relatives whose life revolved around church. They had very strong beliefs, and there was no changing their minds. Who knows maybe that baker thought it would be a sin to make that cake.

[MTK]

I'll never get why some people are so concerned with what others like to do in their bedrooms with another consenting adult. It's small minded and ignorant.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by MTK

I'll never get why some people are so concerned with what others like to do in their bedrooms with another consenting adult. It's small minded and ignorant.

I grew up in a fundamentalist Christian cult and there is just no reasoning with people like that.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk