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.
Apparently, only the word fetus is an accepted, politically correct, language allowed on twitter. Tennessee Congressional Representative, Marsha Blackburn posted a video announcement on twitter, of her campaign to replace retiring TN. U.S. Senator Bob Corker. It included the following,
Quote:
boasts in the ad that she “stopped the sale of baby body parts.”
,
which the twits at twitter deemed inflammatory. Geesh, let us all run for our safe corners, place fingers in our ears and loudly say La la la la la la., over and over, again.
I'm sure it is justified, right progressives? Of course, the use of the word fetuses is helpful in denying there is life, after all. Just the polar opposite of end of life. Both sacred, which should be treated with respect, humanely and honestly. No word-weasling allowed.
Nope, nothing less than selective censorship, based upon political and social position.
So is the NFL. But I'll bet a lot of people and maybe even you are supporting the kneeling players during the anthem.
Yes, as a matter of fact, I do.
If you think hard about it, I'm sure you can figure out how it's possible to think BOTH that the players have a right to kneel and Blackburn has the right to say what she says in a campaign ad, AND that the NFL and Twitter have a right to do what they feel they should do about those actions.
So is the baker, a private business. Censorship is not different than discrimination. If you support one, you can't not support the other and visa versa. Do you honestly think if Twitter had a Pro-Life leadership that they would have selectively censored Congresswoman Blackburn's announcement?
Then there is the question of trusts, or combinations, as they were referred to around the turn of the 20th Century. The social media giants are getting ever closer to be dealt with in a legal sense. It is just a matter of time, if they continue with their one-sided political orientation.
So is the baker, a private business. Censorship is not different than discrimination. If you support one, you can't not support the other and visa versa. Do you honestly think if Twitter had a Pro-Life leadership that they would have selectively censored Congresswoman Blackburn's announcement?
Then there is the question of trusts, or combinations, as they were referred to around the turn of the 20th Century. The social media giants are getting ever closer to be dealt with in a legal sense. It is just a matter of time, if they continue with their one-sided political orientation.
Now there, I agree with you. But that's a general trend in all economic sectors, we've forgotten how to do trust-busting over the past few decades. I'd love to see a lot more of it. Unfortunately, it won't happen during this presidential administration.
BTW, censorship and discrimination are two different things legally. Legally, censorship is something that only a government does.
So is the NFL. But I'll bet a lot of people and maybe even you are supporting the kneeling players during the anthem.
This makes zero sense.
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.
