Lonestar_logic
Republic of Texas
- May 13, 2009
- 24,539
- 2,233
- 205
Typical liberal wanting to trample on constitutional rights.
If that's Lonestar logic....
The Constitution doesn't say a business can't control content. It says the government can't.
No one suggested it did.
My point is that as a typical liberal, Ravi wants to silence (censor) what she doesn't like. If a person doesn't like what they see on social media, then they should excise their right to not engage in social media. But that would be too easy.
Yeah actually you did.
Nothing in the idea of a commercial business controlling its own content relates to any Constitutional issue, and that's what you just invoked. Commercial media controls its own content all the time.
I think I know what I suggested. And yes speech is protected under the Constitution. Social media sites have the right to give a platform to whomever they choose. Too bad you libs want to silence everything that you disagree with.
Speech is protected from the government. That's why it says "Congress shall make no law". It does not say "Twitter shall make no policy".
Free speech -- from the government -- is a primary essential of Liberalism. You're twisting yourself into a rhetorical pretzel here. You've made the case -- correctly in my estimation -- that speech should breathe freely. That's an essential of Liberalism, so well done.
But it's still got nothing to do with the Constitution.
Dude, shut the fuck up. Ravi understood what I meant.
You're trying to defend an argument of your own making.