this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023
247 points (97.7% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2372 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The new bill comes after Andrew Bailey vowed to investigate companies pulling business from X, formerly Twitter over hate speech.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 82 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Setting aside constitutional issues, think about how insane and delusional you have to be to decide that the fact that a significant number of people are protesting your policies means that protesting needs to be ~~prohibited~~ punished.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Bill Text: https://www.senate.mo.gov/24info/pdf-bill/intro/SB1061.pdf

It doesn't prohibit protesting, it basically says that if you engage in "economic boycott" (a term which about a third of the bill is spent defining) then the State of Missouri cannot use you as a vendor, and any contracts with them are null and void.

So less prohibiting protesting and more not buying stuff from protesters. Probably still a 1A violation, though from an odd enough angle I'm not sure.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 11 months ago

Wonder how that would work out given the number of firearms vendors that actively boycott liberal things like budlight. Police departments are going to be all outta ammo.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago

Well, according to the Citizens United decision, corporations are people and money is speech, so a company deciding with who they’re going to spend money is protected speech.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago

Sounds like the anti-BDS laws. Somehow that's a thing, and I'm not sure how that's even allowed.

Also, I was amused that BDS also stands for "Biden Derangement Syndrome". In the years before Denver Post closed their comments, they ramped their censorship way up and for some reason "BDS" would trigger their nanny-filter. I'm supposing even the mention of the boycott of Israel was bridge too far for the nannies at Denver Post.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago

"Well, it brings the subject into view and we hate hearing about it (cry harder, libs!) so we'll just stop people from doing the thing that brings it into view and annoys us." - conservative snowflakes, probably