Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Are you intentionally being obtuse? Don't you think William Randolph Hearst and Andrew Greeley pushed news for ideology?Does that not apply to american media outlets too? Or is manipulating the retarded public only a problem when putin is trying to get us at our throats?The first amendment and free speech are not analogous to contract. I'm NOT saying that punishing bakers for refusing to contract should be legal. I don't, but that's not the issue, imo.It is about liberty.I don't think the baker thing is an analogy. No one is silencing the bakers. They can put up a sign "we don't like gays." They can do that legally. What they are being punished for is "commerce" or refusing to enter into a contract. That may be wrong, but it's not about speech
Facebook should be at liberty to silence any view they want. Bakers should be at liberty to contract, or NOT contract, with whomever they choose.
Rather the issue is the state may NOT have a law preventing the baker (or gay) from exercising free speech, unless it basically amounts to an incitement to violence. That's what Grandpa is incapable of grasping.
OldSchool identifies the problem. When fake actors (and even foreign govts) pose as citizens to disseminate false and intentionally misleading facts .... where does free speech end?
Wasnt greely a novelist? IDK who the other guy is.Are you intentionally being obtuse? Don't you think William Randolph Hearst and Andrew Greeley pushed news for ideology?Does that not apply to american media outlets too? Or is manipulating the retarded public only a problem when putin is trying to get us at our throats?The first amendment and free speech are not analogous to contract. I'm NOT saying that punishing bakers for refusing to contract should be legal. I don't, but that's not the issue, imo.It is about liberty.I don't think the baker thing is an analogy. No one is silencing the bakers. They can put up a sign "we don't like gays." They can do that legally. What they are being punished for is "commerce" or refusing to enter into a contract. That may be wrong, but it's not about speech
Facebook should be at liberty to silence any view they want. Bakers should be at liberty to contract, or NOT contract, with whomever they choose.
Rather the issue is the state may NOT have a law preventing the baker (or gay) from exercising free speech, unless it basically amounts to an incitement to violence. That's what Grandpa is incapable of grasping.
OldSchool identifies the problem. When fake actors (and even foreign govts) pose as citizens to disseminate false and intentionally misleading facts .... where does free speech end?
The point is transparency. We've lost transparency in knowing who is pushing social media posts and "fake news." That should concern everyone. What we do about it is at this point uncertain. And that is what Zuckerberg is being keelhauled over.
We wouldn't need "protected classes" if people would stop discriminating unfairly."basic equality" what does that even mean? There is NO equality when we have "protected class" and other forms of institutional discrimination.Taking a stand for decency and morality and basic equality is not "fake ass."a bakery discriminating?
To be fair and have actual equality, we need to make every type of thinking, branding, thought process, want, need or curiosity, to be a "protected class"
Its only fair, right you fake ass equality junkies?
As you know, i believe a business should be able to discriminate for whatever reason. Its THEIR private property.. but to be a proper utopian model, we need to be more inclusive
Tell your state to make EVERYONE a protected class. Its the regressive thing to do.
Trying to get "morality" legislated is why we had so much discrimination from our govt in the first place.
What basic human rights are you referring to?It's possible to take a stand without that stand including the removal of someone's basic human rights.Taking a stand for decency and morality and basic equality is not "fake ass."
People should have a right to do what they want with their private property. Why should YOU decide what THEY do? Why do i have to give up so many rights to open a business? Why should i lose the right to associate freely?We wouldn't need "protected classes" if people would stop discriminating unfairly."basic equality" what does that even mean? There is NO equality when we have "protected class" and other forms of institutional discrimination.Taking a stand for decency and morality and basic equality is not "fake ass."a bakery discriminating?
To be fair and have actual equality, we need to make every type of thinking, branding, thought process, want, need or curiosity, to be a "protected class"
Its only fair, right you fake ass equality junkies?
As you know, i believe a business should be able to discriminate for whatever reason. Its THEIR private property.. but to be a proper utopian model, we need to be more inclusive
Tell your state to make EVERYONE a protected class. Its the regressive thing to do.
Trying to get "morality" legislated is why we had so much discrimination from our govt in the first place.
There is nothing wrong with decency and if the law says we shall not discriminate, then the courts will uphold "you shall not discriminate."
free association. private property. need more?What basic human rights are you referring to?It's possible to take a stand without that stand including the removal of someone's basic human rights.Taking a stand for decency and morality and basic equality is not "fake ass."
Well you could always google Hearst and/or Greeley. If you don't know who they were, that's not my fault. Nor is there any point in trying to continue discussing the First Amend or Free Speech.Wasnt greely a novelist? IDK who the other guy is.Are you intentionally being obtuse? Don't you think William Randolph Hearst and Andrew Greeley pushed news for ideology?Does that not apply to american media outlets too? Or is manipulating the retarded public only a problem when putin is trying to get us at our throats?The first amendment and free speech are not analogous to contract. I'm NOT saying that punishing bakers for refusing to contract should be legal. I don't, but that's not the issue, imo.It is about liberty.I don't think the baker thing is an analogy. No one is silencing the bakers. They can put up a sign "we don't like gays." They can do that legally. What they are being punished for is "commerce" or refusing to enter into a contract. That may be wrong, but it's not about speech
Facebook should be at liberty to silence any view they want. Bakers should be at liberty to contract, or NOT contract, with whomever they choose.
Rather the issue is the state may NOT have a law preventing the baker (or gay) from exercising free speech, unless it basically amounts to an incitement to violence. That's what Grandpa is incapable of grasping.
OldSchool identifies the problem. When fake actors (and even foreign govts) pose as citizens to disseminate false and intentionally misleading facts .... where does free speech end?
The point is transparency. We've lost transparency in knowing who is pushing social media posts and "fake news." That should concern everyone. What we do about it is at this point uncertain. And that is what Zuckerberg is being keelhauled over.
How is my question being obtuse? You sit there and bitch about transparency but when i bring up the national media your asshole draws up? Why?
I obviously know greeley is a novelist since i said it...Well you could always google Hearst and/or Greeley. If you don't know who they were, that's not my fault. Nor is there any point in trying to continue discussing the First Amend or Free Speech.Wasnt greely a novelist? IDK who the other guy is.Are you intentionally being obtuse? Don't you think William Randolph Hearst and Andrew Greeley pushed news for ideology?Does that not apply to american media outlets too? Or is manipulating the retarded public only a problem when putin is trying to get us at our throats?The first amendment and free speech are not analogous to contract. I'm NOT saying that punishing bakers for refusing to contract should be legal. I don't, but that's not the issue, imo.It is about liberty.
Facebook should be at liberty to silence any view they want. Bakers should be at liberty to contract, or NOT contract, with whomever they choose.
Rather the issue is the state may NOT have a law preventing the baker (or gay) from exercising free speech, unless it basically amounts to an incitement to violence. That's what Grandpa is incapable of grasping.
OldSchool identifies the problem. When fake actors (and even foreign govts) pose as citizens to disseminate false and intentionally misleading facts .... where does free speech end?
The point is transparency. We've lost transparency in knowing who is pushing social media posts and "fake news." That should concern everyone. What we do about it is at this point uncertain. And that is what Zuckerberg is being keelhauled over.
How is my question being obtuse? You sit there and bitch about transparency but when i bring up the national media your asshole draws up? Why?
Greeley and Hearst were media magnets on the scale of Murdoch and Fox. Basically Hearst on the right, and Greeley on the left. Anything the media does today, it did before.I obviously know greeley is a novelist since i said it...Well you could always google Hearst and/or Greeley. If you don't know who they were, that's not my fault. Nor is there any point in trying to continue discussing the First Amend or Free Speech.Wasnt greely a novelist? IDK who the other guy is.Are you intentionally being obtuse? Don't you think William Randolph Hearst and Andrew Greeley pushed news for ideology?Does that not apply to american media outlets too? Or is manipulating the retarded public only a problem when putin is trying to get us at our throats?The first amendment and free speech are not analogous to contract. I'm NOT saying that punishing bakers for refusing to contract should be legal. I don't, but that's not the issue, imo.
Rather the issue is the state may NOT have a law preventing the baker (or gay) from exercising free speech, unless it basically amounts to an incitement to violence. That's what Grandpa is incapable of grasping.
OldSchool identifies the problem. When fake actors (and even foreign govts) pose as citizens to disseminate false and intentionally misleading facts .... where does free speech end?
The point is transparency. We've lost transparency in knowing who is pushing social media posts and "fake news." That should concern everyone. What we do about it is at this point uncertain. And that is what Zuckerberg is being keelhauled over.
How is my question being obtuse? You sit there and bitch about transparency but when i bring up the national media your asshole draws up? Why?
Of course there isnt. Not with you. Not to mention, this is more about discrimination.
"we lack transparency and its a problem except when cnn or fox makes up bullshit. then you are obtuse"
get the fuck outta here
Yes. I would like you to tell me who Youtube is discriminating against that upsets you. Specifically. ISIS recruitment videos, or what?People should have a right to do what they want with their private property. Why should YOU decide what THEY do? Why do i have to give up so many rights to open a business? Why should i lose the right to associate freely?We wouldn't need "protected classes" if people would stop discriminating unfairly."basic equality" what does that even mean? There is NO equality when we have "protected class" and other forms of institutional discrimination.Taking a stand for decency and morality and basic equality is not "fake ass."a bakery discriminating?
To be fair and have actual equality, we need to make every type of thinking, branding, thought process, want, need or curiosity, to be a "protected class"
Its only fair, right you fake ass equality junkies?
As you know, i believe a business should be able to discriminate for whatever reason. Its THEIR private property.. but to be a proper utopian model, we need to be more inclusive
Tell your state to make EVERYONE a protected class. Its the regressive thing to do.
Trying to get "morality" legislated is why we had so much discrimination from our govt in the first place.
There is nothing wrong with decency and if the law says we shall not discriminate, then the courts will uphold "you shall not discriminate."
Guess what cupcake, protected class IS DISCRIMINATION. Thanks for proving my point you are arguing with
Why can youtube censor certain people but i have to be forced to bake a cake? Its discrimination because your skin color or nationality is protected but my ideology isnt.
Either get rid of all discrimination laws or COVER everyone and completely decimate individuality. Thats ACTUALLY equal. Picking and choosing who you can discriminate against isnt.
Do you understand now??
I believe I read somewhere that when you enter the public sphere by opening a business, it is no longer "private."free association. private property. need more?What basic human rights are you referring to?It's possible to take a stand without that stand including the removal of someone's basic human rights.Taking a stand for decency and morality and basic equality is not "fake ass."
Its the same thing our national media does, its just a different way to do it.Greeley and Hearst were media magnets on the scale of Murdoch and Fox. Basically Hearst on the right, and Greeley on the left. Anything the media does today, it did before.I obviously know greeley is a novelist since i said it...Well you could always google Hearst and/or Greeley. If you don't know who they were, that's not my fault. Nor is there any point in trying to continue discussing the First Amend or Free Speech.Wasnt greely a novelist? IDK who the other guy is.Are you intentionally being obtuse? Don't you think William Randolph Hearst and Andrew Greeley pushed news for ideology?Does that not apply to american media outlets too? Or is manipulating the retarded public only a problem when putin is trying to get us at our throats?
The point is transparency. We've lost transparency in knowing who is pushing social media posts and "fake news." That should concern everyone. What we do about it is at this point uncertain. And that is what Zuckerberg is being keelhauled over.
How is my question being obtuse? You sit there and bitch about transparency but when i bring up the national media your asshole draws up? Why?
Of course there isnt. Not with you. Not to mention, this is more about discrimination.
"we lack transparency and its a problem except when cnn or fox makes up bullshit. then you are obtuse"
get the fuck outta here
So far,. only Russia (and maybe Trump) have used fake posters to send fake news to facebook users whom they identified as being likely consumers of the fake news. That is new. The Founders based both the First Amendment and views of free speech on citizens being intelligent enough to filter through propaganda when they knew who sent the propaganda. And propaganda comes from EVERY ideological (and religious) position. Citizens United is directly premised on people can decide facts for themselves when they know who "publishes" the facts. Social media is turning on its head our traditional notions of how citizens can rationally decide things.
Social media isn't going anywhere. After all, I'm posting.
Yes, OL i am complaining about ISIS videos...Yes. I would like you to tell me who Youtube is discriminating against that upsets you. Specifically. ISIS recruitment videos, or what?People should have a right to do what they want with their private property. Why should YOU decide what THEY do? Why do i have to give up so many rights to open a business? Why should i lose the right to associate freely?We wouldn't need "protected classes" if people would stop discriminating unfairly."basic equality" what does that even mean? There is NO equality when we have "protected class" and other forms of institutional discrimination.Taking a stand for decency and morality and basic equality is not "fake ass."a bakery discriminating?
To be fair and have actual equality, we need to make every type of thinking, branding, thought process, want, need or curiosity, to be a "protected class"
Its only fair, right you fake ass equality junkies?
As you know, i believe a business should be able to discriminate for whatever reason. Its THEIR private property.. but to be a proper utopian model, we need to be more inclusive
Tell your state to make EVERYONE a protected class. Its the regressive thing to do.
Trying to get "morality" legislated is why we had so much discrimination from our govt in the first place.
There is nothing wrong with decency and if the law says we shall not discriminate, then the courts will uphold "you shall not discriminate."
Guess what cupcake, protected class IS DISCRIMINATION. Thanks for proving my point you are arguing with
Why can youtube censor certain people but i have to be forced to bake a cake? Its discrimination because your skin color or nationality is protected but my ideology isnt.
Either get rid of all discrimination laws or COVER everyone and completely decimate individuality. Thats ACTUALLY equal. Picking and choosing who you can discriminate against isnt.
Do you understand now??
Thats spin to justify institutional discrimination. What a crockI believe I read somewhere that when you enter the public sphere by opening a business, it is no longer "private."free association. private property. need more?What basic human rights are you referring to?It's possible to take a stand without that stand including the removal of someone's basic human rights.Taking a stand for decency and morality and basic equality is not "fake ass."
Seriously, I'd appreciate a couple that are reputable. A couple. I'm here for another two hours.Yes, OL i am complaining about ISIS videos...Yes. I would like you to tell me who Youtube is discriminating against that upsets you. Specifically. ISIS recruitment videos, or what?People should have a right to do what they want with their private property. Why should YOU decide what THEY do? Why do i have to give up so many rights to open a business? Why should i lose the right to associate freely?We wouldn't need "protected classes" if people would stop discriminating unfairly."basic equality" what does that even mean? There is NO equality when we have "protected class" and other forms of institutional discrimination.Taking a stand for decency and morality and basic equality is not "fake ass."
Trying to get "morality" legislated is why we had so much discrimination from our govt in the first place.
There is nothing wrong with decency and if the law says we shall not discriminate, then the courts will uphold "you shall not discriminate."
Guess what cupcake, protected class IS DISCRIMINATION. Thanks for proving my point you are arguing with
Why can youtube censor certain people but i have to be forced to bake a cake? Its discrimination because your skin color or nationality is protected but my ideology isnt.
Either get rid of all discrimination laws or COVER everyone and completely decimate individuality. Thats ACTUALLY equal. Picking and choosing who you can discriminate against isnt.
Do you understand now??
DUDE, there articles of youtube doing messed up shit to people simply because they dont like their content.
I would gladly post many examples but you usually leave at that point, or just ignore it. If you promise not to do that i will post some links. There are only like 45K
I don't think so. When you serve the PUBLIC, it is a PUBLIC enterprise. LOLThats spin to justify institutional discrimination. What a crockI believe I read somewhere that when you enter the public sphere by opening a business, it is no longer "private."free association. private property. need more?What basic human rights are you referring to?It's possible to take a stand without that stand including the removal of someone's basic human rights.Taking a stand for decency and morality and basic equality is not "fake ass."
I wish this was a jokeI don't think so. When you serve the PUBLIC, it is a PUBLIC enterprise. LOLThats spin to justify institutional discrimination. What a crockI believe I read somewhere that when you enter the public sphere by opening a business, it is no longer "private."free association. private property. need more?What basic human rights are you referring to?It's possible to take a stand without that stand including the removal of someone's basic human rights.
https://gizmodo.com/former-facebook-workers-we-routinely-suppressed-conser-1775461006Seriously, I'd appreciate a couple that are reputable. A couple. I'm here for another two hours.Yes, OL i am complaining about ISIS videos...Yes. I would like you to tell me who Youtube is discriminating against that upsets you. Specifically. ISIS recruitment videos, or what?People should have a right to do what they want with their private property. Why should YOU decide what THEY do? Why do i have to give up so many rights to open a business? Why should i lose the right to associate freely?We wouldn't need "protected classes" if people would stop discriminating unfairly."basic equality" what does that even mean? There is NO equality when we have "protected class" and other forms of institutional discrimination.
Trying to get "morality" legislated is why we had so much discrimination from our govt in the first place.
There is nothing wrong with decency and if the law says we shall not discriminate, then the courts will uphold "you shall not discriminate."
Guess what cupcake, protected class IS DISCRIMINATION. Thanks for proving my point you are arguing with
Why can youtube censor certain people but i have to be forced to bake a cake? Its discrimination because your skin color or nationality is protected but my ideology isnt.
Either get rid of all discrimination laws or COVER everyone and completely decimate individuality. Thats ACTUALLY equal. Picking and choosing who you can discriminate against isnt.
Do you understand now??
DUDE, there articles of youtube doing messed up shit to people simply because they dont like their content.
I would gladly post many examples but you usually leave at that point, or just ignore it. If you promise not to do that i will post some links. There are only like 45K
"basic equality" what does that even mean? There is NO equality when we have "protected class" and other forms of institutional discrimination.Taking a stand for decency and morality and basic equality is not "fake ass."a bakery discriminating?
To be fair and have actual equality, we need to make every type of thinking, branding, thought process, want, need or curiosity, to be a "protected class"
Its only fair, right you fake ass equality junkies?
As you know, i believe a business should be able to discriminate for whatever reason. Its THEIR private property.. but to be a proper utopian model, we need to be more inclusive
Tell your state to make EVERYONE a protected class. Its the regressive thing to do.
Trying to get "morality" legislated is why we had so much discrimination from our govt in the first place.
