Donald Trump Not Allowed Back On Twitter

[pknopp]

In fact, that's exactly what we are talking about. Twitter outlawed conservative speech and banned all conservatives.

No they didn't. Argument ignored.

 

[surada]

What is a free speech platform?

One you own.

 

[Uncensored2008]

No they didn't. Argument ignored.

You'll just stick to lying.

No matter, censorship is over at Twitter, America will once again hear both sides of the argument. You know your Reich can't survive an open and honest debate.

 

[pknopp]

You'll just stick to lying.

No matter,

Yes it matters.......

 

[Uncensored2008]

One you own.

I don't own USMB - but free speech is allowed here.

The Nazi democrat Reich withers in the light of day. Free and open debate are poison to the democrat agenda.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Yes it matters.......

Are you going to buy Twitter and rehire the censors?

Free speech DOES matter - it is the death knell to you Nazis.

 

[pknopp]

Are you going to buy Twitter and rehire the censors?

Free speech DOES matter - it is the death knell to you Nazis.

When you (you specifically) have to lie about something to make your point, you have no point to make.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I don't own USMB - but free speech is allowed here.

Not exactly. We have to abide by the rules or be banished. Well at least some of us do.

Also the concept of free speech generally refers to the 1st amendment restriction against the government interfering with one's free speech rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

One you own.

I still don't get it but okay.

 

[surada]

What is the terminal focus on Trump?

Do you care about Twitter?

 

[surada]

I still don't get it but okay.

You can say pretty much anything if you own social media.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Not exactly. We have to abide by the rules or be banished. Well at least some of us do.

No, with the exception of Don't Taz me, everyone has to follow the rules. That's why it's NOT censorship.

I have to abide by the same rules you do - no Twitter exception because you're a lefty.

Also the concept of free speech generally refers to the 1st amendment restriction against the government interfering with one's free speech rights as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.

Nonsense. The first Amendment restrains government from infringing the god given, or natural right to free speech.

Do you grasp natural rights? Essentially, those are rights that exist absent interference. No one "grants" you the right to speak your mind, they can only infringe on the right that exists if they aren't there.

I'll ask you the same question I asked Winterborn, should Motel Six be allowed to refuse to provide lodging to black people?

Why, or why not?

If not, how does that differ from Twitter refusing service to conservatives?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

No, with the exception of Don't Taz me, everyone has to follow the rules. That's why it's NOT censorship.

I have to abide by the same rules you do - no Twitter exception because you're a lefty.

No, it's not censorship because the owners of the site are not "the government". And the rules are not enforced equally even though they are supposed to be.

Nonsense. The first Amendment restrains government from infringing the god given, or natural right to free speech.

I've already stated that, among other things (what the 1st prohibits)

I'll ask you the same question I asked Winterborn, should Motel Six be allowed to refuse to provide lodging to black people?

Why, or why not?

If not, how does that differ from Twitter refusing service to conservatives?

Places that provide lodging are "places of public accommodation. To refuse lodging to a Black person based on their race would be a violation of the Civil Right Act of 1964.

Race is one of the protected classes covered by the CRA of 1964 and therefore it would be unlawful to discriminate against a person based on their race. Being a conservative is a choice but aside from that, conservatism is not a protected class.

I couldn't find a clear answer that isn't tied to violations of the Americans With Disabilities Act as to whether or not a website (Twitter in this case) is considered a "place of public accommodation". The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that "websites are not a public accommodation under the ADA"

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

You can say pretty much anything if you own social media.

Well if as the owner you can say anything you want, but others cannot, then in my opinion it can't be said that the platform offers free speech because that "privilege" does not apply to all or all equally.