Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, Janelle, abortion is not like slavery, so stop looking foolish in comparing the two. For one thing, what if a female slave's idea of resisting slavery was to perform self abortions on herself? If you think she shouldn't, then if you were a slave, would you want your children to become the same as you? SLAVES! Abortion is not slavery, or is it comparable to slavery.
I guess you didn't get the whole message. Slaves were thought of as only one fifth a human or some such thing and babies in the womb are not considered human by those who think it is ok to kill them, even up to birth.
To be fair. I’d say “the powers that be” at Instagram over reacted about this cartoon. I thought the cartoon was a clever way to point out that how we feel now, is not necessarily the way that people in the future will feel about a controversial subject. I did not think it was hate speech at all.
If Zuckerberg wants to shadow ban people on his platform then he needs to be truthful about it. If he wants to censor their content then be up front in doing it. Right now he has people in the background deciding what is hate and what is ok. It's their biases that will be posted so be open about it.
Hate speech is what they decide is hate speech. Remember that.
Status:
"81 Years, NOT 91 Felonies"
(set 26 days ago)
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,597,197 times
Reputation: 5696
Ahh, what's there to prevent you from setting up some other new site. Facebook overtook Myspace. Google overtook Yahoo. What is there to prevent you from developing the next site that overtakes Facebook, Google, and such? Just show some personal responsibility and stop whining about monopolies choking stuff off. It takes a lot less money to get your own server, build a site (start from the bottom, then work your way up), and such than it does to start a retailer, after all. In short, the startup costs for a site are much less than the start up costs for a "brick and mortar" store.
Just a note, we are talking about Instagram, not Twitter.
Why do you think that a private business can't make up its own rules about the conditions under which they will accept someone as their customer? That was recently affirmed by SCOTUS, remember? https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/04/polit...urt/index.html
I'll bet if I looked, I'd find a post by you (and others now criticizing Instagram/Twitter/Google/Facebook et al) hailing this SCOTUS decision as a big win.
I understand people who want to forget their failures, but forgetting your wins? That's just plain weird.
BTW, my stance on the wedding cake controversy at the time was that since the bakery was a public business, it was obligated to serve anyone who walked in the door. IOW, your money is as good as mine, and vice versa. And I still think the same. Seems like you now agree with me, but too bad, so sad - (the collective) you got the SCOTUS ruling you wanted. Now live with it.
Why do you think that a private business can't make up its own rules about the conditions under which they will accept someone as their customer?
Sure they can make up rules. I'm just wondering which of their rules violated? It doesn't seem to violate any of them. How can anyone take it seriously?
Not really. SCOTUS affirmed that the state discriminated against the baker's religion when they punished them. They basically punted on the free speech/discrimination issue.
That would only be relevant if political beliefs were a protected class under state law. Just like here at CD forums, anybody can be censored or banned at anytime without recourse.
Should Fox News be required to host a liberal blogger on their website? Should Breitbart have to allow liberal comments and content?
Yes, I agree. Under current law and judicial precedent, a private entity is within its rights to pick and choose its customers. That means that Instagram is free to moderate its users' posts or even ban a particular user for violating its standards.
If a baker can refuse to bake a cake for any customer, then a social media company can refuse to accept posts from any customer.
Nevertheless, I personally think that a business operating in the public sphere should be required to accept all comers. Raises a whole bunch of other questions, I realize.
Still, one person's money should be as good as another's.
I'm only pointing out that conservatives who celebrated their cake controversy "win" are either rampant hypocrites or just plain dumb when it comes to the issue of public businesses rejecting certain customers.
The trouble comes when a small group of companies collude together to control the market. We've seen examples where individuals have been deplatformed across the entire existing infrastructure for practicing wrongthink.
Balderdash. They can run all the websites they want. The large platforms give them ad revenue, is all - and they want that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
