Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DoughtyOne

If government agencies were interfering and causing people to be banned for expressing political views or presenting facts the political party in power did not like, that’s a whole different kettle of fish. You were arguing this:

********
“Try telling a Black person they can’t shop in your store.

Try telling a homosexual you won’t bake them a cake for a
wedding.

Now, explain to me why those two things not run by the
government are impossible to do.

The first amendment is a civil right every bit as much
as a Black person having access.

Anyone participating on a comments web sight, has a
right to participate.

To not allow it, is denying their first amendment rights.

The majority has civil rights too.

Thanks.
*******

It’s true a private business cannot bar or ban people because of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, etc. But “comments web sites” can and do put limits on speech. They are free to ban whomever they please for whatever reason. Democrats cannot spout off on FR — any who try get the zot. A gardening forum can ban people for discussing astronomy and an astronomy forum can ban people for posting about football. And so on.

But if the government gets in on the act and uses its powers of coercion to curtail citizens from expressing their political views or presenting facts ... that’s a different story, so long as the the citizen is speaking within the law.*

I suspect the coercion thing is key. If a Trump staffer called JimRob and told him Trump did not like the stuff CatHerd and DoughtyOne were posting here, and he looked at our posts and did not like them either and banned us, that’s one thing. If a member of Trump’s staff called him while Trump was still president and said the same and also hinted that the IRS would be sicced on JimRob if he did not ban us, that’s something else entirely.

*Free speech does have limits. We have laws against libel, laws against incitement to violence, laws against terroristic threats, and laws against incitement to immanent harm (eg shouting fire in a crowded theater).


551 posted on 12/04/2022 5:25:01 PM PST by CatHerd (Whoever said "All's fair in love and war" probably never participated in either.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 546 | View Replies ]


To: CatHerd

Thanks for the reasoned discussion. I understand where you
are coming from.


555 posted on 12/04/2022 9:02:44 PM PST by DoughtyOne (I pledge allegiance to the flag of the U S of A, and to the {Const'l} REPUBLIC for which it stands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 551 | View Replies ]

To: CatHerd

Very good


562 posted on 12/05/2022 5:44:35 AM PST by frogjerk (More people have died trusting the government than not trusting the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 551 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson