This guy is a fucking idiot. His ruling essentially reads 'no one is allowed to govern but republicans'
These assholes are like the kid who would fight you on the playground over a swing, and then never swing in it
this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
70 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
5 readers
1 users here now
@politics on kbin.social is a magazine to share and discuss current events news, opinion/analysis, videos, or other informative content related to politicians, politics, or policy-making at all levels of governance (federal, state, local), both domestic and international. Members of all political perspectives are welcome here, though we run a tight ship. Community guidelines and submission rules were co-created between the Mod Team and early members of @politics. Please read all community guidelines and submission rules carefully before engaging our magazine.
founded 2 years ago
Misinformation about vaccines and lies about the Covid virus was asked to be removed. I think Facebook/meta helped kill many right wingers because of these lying memes.
Republicans want to be able to lie on these platforms. And they love the uneducated. I know someone who died believing their lies. I know another who ended up in the hospital because of these lies. She almost died. And now has a hospital bill she can't pay.
Stop voting for republicans, they don't want to help you. They have no policies but cut taxes on the rich and hating on people.
I'm really conflicted here. If conservatives insist on killing themselves by being anti-science, I should support their right to die as they insist.
But I don't support their burden on shared resources (hospitals) on their way out. So many people who don't subscribe to those conspiracy theorist views died as collateral damage during the pandemic because the hospitals didn't have the resources to support all of their usual burdens plus the wave of COVID-ill vaccine deniers.
Let people opt out of services for a very small tax incentive, it will be hilarious schadenfreude.
No no no no no nope not even as a joke.
If you can financially gain from opting out, very poor people will have no choice but to opt out and risk it. Proven time and time again. People should not be allowed to waive their rights for petty personal gains. Your rights are unwaivable, that's what makes them rights.
Your rights are absolutely able to be waived, they just can't be taken away. It's a subtle but meaningful difference.
If you're being compensated to waive them, you aren't waiving them freely. So it's being taken away.
That's a fair point.
That's entirely valid but not the same as "your rights are unwaivable".
Agreed on the whole thing up until "your rights are unwaivable". If that were the case then those are not your rights to begin with. Freedom includes the freedom to abstain.
FBI, DHS, HHS, and Justice Department: Ok, thanks for that. I've noted it. Now excuse me I have to talk to the FBI, DHS, HHS, and Justice Department. Bye.
Title is a bit disingenuous, the ruling actually says they are prohibited
from even talking to social media companies with “the purpose of urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech.”
Government should not be cohering social media companies to silence speech, this seems fine to me.
So for instance a politician saying, "hey Facebook maybe should stop promoting ISIS" would be strictly forbidden.
Got it.
ISIS probably isn't the best example, because promoting terrorism and advocating violence isn't protected free speech. Regardless, I don't think this would apply to a politician making a general statement like this, but government agencies working behind closed doors to suppress legal content.
It actually is protected free speech in the USA to promote violence. It is not protected free speech to promote or incite violence with the imminent threat of harm.
The American Nazi Party and the KKK won their SCOTUS fight over that, thanks in part to the ACLU.
"Free speech" is doing a lot of work there. As always.
For example, I think deliberate misinformation should be treated the same as harassment, fraud, and incitement. That is, a kind of speech that is not protected free speech. Just like defamation, you should have to reach an actual malice standard. But unlike defamation, there is not a clear "victim" to act as the plaintiff, so the state would need to step in on behalf of the people to act as one.
view more: next ›