The Entrepreneur Forum | Financial Freedom | Starting a Business | Motivation | Money | Success

Welcome to the only entrepreneur forum dedicated to building life-changing wealth.

Build a Fastlane business. Earn real financial freedom. Join free.

Join over 80,000 entrepreneurs who have rejected the paradigm of mediocrity and said "NO!" to underpaid jobs, ascetic frugality, and suffocating savings rituals— learn how to build a Fastlane business that pays both freedom and lifestyle affluence.

Free registration at the forum removes this block.

Parler Taken Down. Your Thoughts?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gapple

Contributor
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
76%
Dec 19, 2018
29
22
Looks like I'm one of the few people who leans more towards the left here. That's interesting.

What are the critics that you have on the left/left-wing policies?
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

WJK

Legendary Contributor
EPIC CONTRIBUTOR
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
256%
Oct 9, 2017
3,115
7,961
Alaska
Looks like I'm one of the few people who leans more towards the left here. That's interesting.

What are the critics that you have on the left/left-wing policies?
Thanks for asking. My biggest problem is that we as citizens need to debate and discuss the issues and problems. That isn't happening. I feel dismissed and minimalized for asking my questions -- and most of them start with how, who, what, or why.

How are you going to do that?
Why are you doing that?
How are you going to pay for that?
Why is that the best way to do....?
How can we do that better? faster? cheaper?
What can we add or subtract from this situation to make it better?
Is this a self-correcting problem or do we need to act?
Who is really behind this? and who is really benefiting?
What is there an underlying reason for doing ....?
And, on and on...
 

Gapple

Contributor
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
76%
Dec 19, 2018
29
22
Thanks for asking. My biggest problem is that we as citizens need to debate and discuss the issues and problems. That isn't happening. I feel dismissed and minimalized for asking my questions -- and most of them start with how, who, what, or why.
When does it happen for example? For what issues?

I'm not a US citizen btw. However, I generally resonate more with the left. I know the general trends in the US, but not all details about a specific politician or specific policies.
 

Xeon

All Cars Kneel Before Pagani.
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
191%
Sep 3, 2017
2,427
4,628
Singapore
G

Guest-5ty5s4

Guest
Looks like I'm one of the few people who leans more towards the left here. That's interesting.

What are the critics that you have on the left/left-wing policies?
Mostly economics and your right to property.

As business owners, we do a lot of shit that we hate just to maintain and grow the business. For instance, managing 220 employees at a time, and over 2,000 employees over the life of the business (not to mention thousands of customers and projects).

When Biden proposes a tax plan that would take 40% of the value of your multigenerational business on sale, that’s when you go hard right.

Democrats are constantly taking from us. We pay taxes on our taxes then we are taxed on that too.

Mostly we get by by the skin of our teeth, in spite of terrible government policies, but the left wants to act like we owe them something for doing us a favor.

The last 50 years have mostly been us trying to grow and succeed in spite of government policies that hurt us.

Someday this business will be sold, but if it’s under Biden’s tax plan, they will take almost half of it.

My grandfather is 80 years old and started this mid 8 figure company over 50 years ago with 3 guys and a van. The left wants to tell him “you didn’t build that.” Bullshit.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MattR82

Gold Contributor
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
178%
Oct 4, 2015
1,394
2,480
41
Brisbane
Did you join Parler and see for yourself? Because I didn't see or follow any of that. I actually joined when the awaken with JP YouTube channel prompted everyone to follow him on parler after YouTube and Facebook threatened him.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

loop101

Platinum Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
161%
Mar 3, 2013
1,557
2,505
I expect one of three things to happen with Conservative Censorship by Big Tech, listed in likelihood:
  1. It ends because States sue them for violating the State's rights of residents (several states are looking in to this)
  2. It continues but Conservative websites become aggregators of digitally signed Usenet postings (roughly what Jack Dorsey recently said was the only solution)
  3. It ends because Section 230 ends causing them to be liable for defamatory content they allow
I prefer #2 because it would be unfiltered, decentralized, potentially anonymous, and digitally signed. Content creators would be independent voices that would be "carried" by popular aggregators, but users could still "override" their favorite aggregator and add an "unpopular voice".

There are a lot of unpopular websites on the web that are very profitable. They figured out how to survive long ago, and people will end up studying how they did it. I believe Parler is now hosted in Russia, for example. And there are some Asian payment processors that ignore all the "but they're a Nazi!" rhetoric.

Scott Adams recently pointed out that if Amazon has a competitor where the main difference is that the competitor wont kick you off for political reasons, then Amazon should lose business to them.

I expect all this censorship will be a huge boost to Progressive Web Apps over Native mobile apps, and should also help Bitcoin.
 
Last edited:

WestCoast

Gold Contributor
FASTLANE INSIDER
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
311%
Jan 20, 2008
506
1,573
Rhode Island for now.
Attached is one of the reasons why I no longer use Google.
And why all big tech is the same to me. Because... it is the same...


16 Companies Who Dominate All Google Searches
 

Attachments

  • google searches.png
    google searches.png
    930 KB · Views: 37

Charnell

Block me if you're a quack
FASTLANE INSIDER
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
276%
Oct 12, 2014
1,091
3,009
Kansas City
Unphased by it being taken down. Maybe they should have had a bit more control in their process.

From what I understand about Parler, it was a platform that allowed conversations & posts free from moderation. Primarily catering to conservatives, it also housed a more alt-right group that turned it into a breeding ground/echo chamber. Cool, no problem there at all. Let them talk.

But if I'm AWS, Apple, Google, payment processor X, or whoever and don't agree with that sort of content being created, I'm getting rid of them. In the same way you can't host porn sites on AWS or use any mainstream payment processors, Parler was too high risk for them. They should have done their research.

You would expect a forum for pedophiles to discuss what they would do to children to get taken down, a social site that allowed terrorists to talk openly about their plans is not something to be associated with. Even if they're the micro-minority of users, if it's unmoderated then it's the whole site that's the problem. "A few bad apples" as they say.

As far as freedom of speech goes, if that was the case, this forum would be nothing but advertisements. When MJ bans a user for a landfill, drive-by, spam advert, is that infringing on their rights? Or is it because MJ does not want this forum to turn into a cesspool and it's MJ's business?
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.
Last edited:

AFMKelvin

Some Profound Quote Goes Here
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
199%
Jan 26, 2016
733
1,456
31
Rice, Texas
Good. Parler is an absolute cesspool. All you see is crazy conspiracy theories, racism, hate, misinformation, threatening of violence, white supremacists, and anti-intellectualism. I've seen truly disgusting things on there.

Thankfully, FBI is monitoring EVERYONE on there.

When some people are too dumb to use properly social media platforms and share hate, stupid conspiracies theories, etc. it's better to kick them out.

That why we have prisons by the way because some people are unfit for society. That's the same thing for the usage of social media platforms. Their freedom needs to be restricted so that they don't hurt anybody.

These are the people the founding fathers fought against and warned about. Stay away from people like this in all facets of life.
 

loop101

Platinum Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
161%
Mar 3, 2013
1,557
2,505
Looks like I'm one of the few people who leans more towards the left here. That's interesting.

What are the critics that you have on the left/left-wing policies?

I think politics is a banned topic on this forum.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

charlescorn

PARKED
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
0% - New User
Sep 19, 2019
1
0
For example, it shouldn't be against the law for me to grope a chick in public, but it shouldn't be against the law for said chick to stab me through the neck as a response either.
Imagine you're the "chick". Now imagine the guy groping her is twice the size of her. Can you see the problem?

One of the essential justifications for having laws and police is that you no longer need to rely on physical strength to protect yourself or take revenge. Your idea would require the "chick" not only to be able to wield a knife, but to overpower her attacker.

Most everything should be legal and if it were, we wouldn't so much heinous stuff going on.
You might want to read some history books to see what went on before we had a working judicial and policing system. There was quite a lot of heinous stuff going on.


However, anyone who disagrees should be able to go after them any way they choose, even if that includes violence/doxxing/hacking/whatever.
We'd all end up in a constantly violent society, where only the physically strong (or people rich enough to buy the weapons) would have the "choice".

This is the world you want?
 

j0elsuf

Bronze Contributor
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
106%
Dec 15, 2020
142
150
Imagine you're the "chick". Now imagine the guy groping her is twice the size of her. Can you see the problem?
No I can't.

Have you ever thought about groping a chick who clearly had mace at the ready? Or for that matter, performing any other similar form of assault on anyone who clearly had a weapon? Same principle here.
One of the essential justifications for having laws and police is that you no longer need to rely on physical strength to protect yourself or take revenge.
Law enforcers clearly don't do this. At least not without acting like Judge Dredd about it and assaulting/murdering you for no reason.

Oh and this has nothing to do with races, ages, genders, whatever. It affects everyone.
Your idea would require the "chick" not only to be able to wield a knife, but to overpower her attacker.
Plenty of resources available to learn this. Literally millions of self-defense classes etc. Nearly every chick I have dated knows how to use a handgun. All of them openly carry mace. They know how to protect themselves. So no, this idea is not far-fetched at all.
You might want to read some history books to see what went on before we had a working judicial and policing system. There was quite a lot of heinous stuff going on.
Umm, I have a background in history. People in power have been destroying the property of and murdering those who they rule over without any penalty for literally tens of thousands of years, if not hundreds of thousands of years. The founding fathers of the US were deeply aware of this and did all they could to have just the right amount of governing systems but not too much.

Well guess what? For about 100 or so years, we've had too much.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely, especially when a judicial and policing system is put in place.
We'd all end up in a constantly violent society, where only the physically strong (or people rich enough to buy the weapons) would have the "choice".

This is the world you want?
This is the world we are currently living in right now if you haven't noticed.

Yes, this would intensify for a little while (maybe even a long stretch) if most laws were removed but just like places that have legalized drug use report less drug use over time, the same would happen with other stuff being legal.

People don't break the law, they break themselves against it. Once you realize that someone can steal from you just like you stole from them, you won't want to steal anything anymore. This is a very lame example but you should get the idea.

I did say that doing this would make most uncomfortable. Hell, it would make me uncomfortable for a bit. But over time we would naturally develop an air of understanding among each other. There are quite a few YouTube videos that explore this, or at least there used to be.

Society needs to play the long game. More laws/regulations/censorship is a short term solution and it always has been. Yes, SOME laws/regulations/censorship did their part to improve society but even a broken clock is right twice a day.

So while one Parler has been taken down, eight more will appear in its place and eighty more stupid laws preventing those will pass because of it, resulting in negative experiences for anyone except the ones who made the laws/regulations, who don't use those platforms anyways.

The EXACT same thing happened with the War on Drugs in the 1980s. Punishments were intensified and what happened? MORE drugs were made that had even worse effects and drug use (especially for these new drugs) went up.

Communication (which is what social media is) works the exact same way.

Just like tradcons declared a very unsuccessful war on drugs 30-40 years ago, progressives are declaring an equally unsuccessful war on communication now (which tradcons also started in the mid 1980s with TV and radio, by the way).

I hope this explains my position a bit better. Although a world without restrictions would be nice for my kind, it probably wouldn't work for others and I understand that. These are just my opinions at the end of the day.

The last thing I want to do in this community is come off as a try-hard AnCap like Adam Kokesh. I like Kokesh but he's trying to be a modern-day Nelson Mandela and failing at it. Badly.

A lot of us value freedom over security/forceful restraint without any explanation and that's why this kind of thing bothers us so much.

I know it bothers me, just like the War on Drugs bothered me 30 years ago, just like the Patriot Act bothered me 20 years ago, and just like SOPA/PIPA (remember THOSE? Yikes!) did 10 years ago.
 
Last edited:

WJK

Legendary Contributor
EPIC CONTRIBUTOR
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
256%
Oct 9, 2017
3,115
7,961
Alaska
No I can't.

Have you ever thought about groping a chick who clearly had mace at the ready? Or for that matter, performing any other similar form of assault on anyone who clearly had a weapon? Same principle here.

Law enforcers clearly don't do this. At least not without acting like Judge Dredd about it and assaulting/murdering you for no reason.

Oh and this has nothing to do with races, ages, genders, whatever. It affects everyone.

Plenty of resources available to learn this. Literally millions of self-defense classes etc. Nearly every chick I have dated knows how to use a handgun. All of them openly carry mace. They know how to protect themselves. So no, this idea is not far-fetched at all.

Umm, I have a background in history. People in power have been destroying the property of and murdering those who they rule over without any penalty for literally tens of thousands of years, if not hundreds of thousands of years. The founding fathers of the US were deeply aware of this and did all they could to have just the right amount of governing systems but not too much.

Well guess what? For about 100 or so years, we've had too much.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely, especially when a judicial and policing system is put in place.

This is the world we are currently living in right now if you haven't noticed.

Yes, this would intensify for a little while (maybe even a long stretch) if most laws were removed but just like places that have legalized drug use report less drug use over time, the same would happen with other stuff being legal.

People don't break the law, they break themselves against it. Once you realize that someone can steal from you just like you stole from them, you won't want to steal anything anymore. This is a very lame example but you should get the idea.

I did say that doing this would make most uncomfortable. Hell, it would make me uncomfortable for a bit. But over time we would naturally develop an air of understanding among each other. There are quite a few YouTube videos that explore this, or at least there used to be.

Society needs to play the long game. More laws/regulations/censorship is a short term solution and it always has been. Yes, SOME laws/regulations/censorship did their part to improve society but even a broken clock is right twice a day.

So while one Parler has been taken down, eight more will appear in its place and eighty more stupid laws preventing those will pass because of it, resulting in negative experiences for anyone except the ones who made the laws/regulations, who don't use those platforms anyways.

The EXACT same thing happened with the War on Drugs in the 1980s. Punishments were intensified and what happened? MORE drugs were made that had even worse effects and drug use (especially for these new drugs) went up.

Communication (which is what social media is) works the exact same way.

Just like tradcons declared a very unsuccessful war on drugs 30-40 years ago, progressives are declaring an equally unsuccessful war on communication now (which tradcons also started in the mid 1980s with TV and radio, by the way).

I hope this explains my position a bit better. Although a world without restrictions would be nice for my kind, it probably wouldn't work for others and I understand that. These are just my opinions at the end of the day.

The last thing I want to do in this community is come off as a try-hard AnCap like Adam Kokesh. I like Kokesh but he's trying to be a modern-day Nelson Mandela and failing at it. Badly.

A lot of us value freedom over security/forceful restraint without any explanation and that's why this kind of thing bothers us so much.

I know it bothers me, just like the War on Drugs bothered me 30 years ago, just like the Patriot Act bothered me 20 years ago, and just like SOPA/PIPA (remember THOSE? Yikes!) did 10 years ago.
I totally understand where you are coming from. I tend to be a conservative Libertarian. I just want to work and be left alone. I agree. The War on Drugs was SO stupid and ineffective. The Patriot Act further eroded our constitutional rights as we saw with their electronic spying. And now they want to tell us what we can say and think on the net. This is going to create a knee-jerk reaction that will come back to haunt these people who think that they are so smart. Now that everyone has a camera, cloud storage space, and nothing ever goes away, plausible deniability doesn't work as well.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

NewManRising

Silver Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
147%
Oct 30, 2017
484
711
Los Angeles
The irony of people crying about "muh freedom of speech", "muh private property" but they cry even more when a company exercises its rights.

Sounds like a bunch of commies.

Companies have the right not to host people or other companies, especially if they violate their ToS. Imagine telling someone they can't kick someone else out of their house.
But the TOS should be applied universally. Not politically motivated. There are obvious double standards. The funny thing I see in this thread is people who keep using the " it's a private company and they have a right to choose who can use their service" argument.

You guys are purposely playing stupid.
 

chimichangatime

Contributor
Read Fastlane!
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
178%
Mar 1, 2018
32
57
50
sacramento, ca
@Gapple I am not surprised that this site leans Libertarian/right, actually. I lean VERY left. In fact, I think I don't pay enough taxes. History shows that progressive societies do better. Rising tide floats all boats, etc. More money in the hands of the spenders means more money in the economy, upward spiral! Our economy is, after all, consumer-driven. The moochers always exist but aren't NEARLY as prevalent as the Randian folks would have you believe. Big L libertarianism simply has never worked in the real world, and, yes, it's been tried many times. Even Ayn herself took more than she paid into Social Security.

@Charnell is right, Parler didn't have any control because they were on AWS and, well, they violated the terms and/or became very inconvenient, depending on which way you look at it.

Meanwhile, the Pirate Bay is laughing at the Parler idiots for not being able to stay online. Pirate Bay co-founder criticises Parler for its lack of resilience

IMHO, Amazon enforced their TOS, simple as that. You don't like it? Don't use Amazon. @DiamondDog and others are spot-on. Go look at what's hosted on AWS and be sure to boycott all that stuff, too, while you're avoiding Amazon. Good luck.

Nobody is telling you what you can say or think on the internet, they're just not willing to take on that liability. There were Parler posts LITERALLY planning to kidnap and kill people. It's not a joke. These people already left Reddit when /r/TheDonald was banned for similar stuff after REPEATED warnings.

I mean, look, I hate Trump with a burning passion but I'd NEVER allow someone to call for his death on anything that I own because I don't believe in that. I don't even let people say that in my presence. Let the system work, let's not call for violence, let's call for justice as done by the Justice system.

The point I really wanted to make is that this is not censorship. It's a business trying to stay afloat, and they're doing what's best for them. That's business. Also, 1st Amendment only applies to Uncle Sam (*some limitations apply). Conservatism isn't a protected status. Very "snowflakey" for a group that likes to point a finger and call people snowflakes.

@j0elsuf, you imply Bezos is a progressive by saying there's a progressive war on communication and implying Amazon is said progressive when they banned Parler. Bezos is by no means a progressive! Also, I disagree on your comparison of the war on drugs to Parler - not apt at all. Smoking weed and watching cartoons isn't at all like planning to hang the VP of the US. Not even in the same universe.
 

WJK

Legendary Contributor
EPIC CONTRIBUTOR
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
256%
Oct 9, 2017
3,115
7,961
Alaska
Nobody is telling you what you can say or think on the internet, they're just not willing to take on that liability.
What liability? They are covered as a platform under 230. They can't be sued for content. Seriously? So why did they do it now?

I see this more as a cautionary tale for both sides.
Parler built their whole world on top of other people's businesses. That gave those providers and platforms the power to kill their business. It's obvious that they didn't have a Plan B and C if those relationships soured or changed -- making them no longer profitable. This a classic mistake that we have seen over and over again.

Big Tech has shown its true colors and they lost a lot of luster. The collection of different companies apparently moved in tandem when they flexed their joint power against Trump. Now there are tremors from other world leaders. These companies have brought themselves a bunch of unintended consequences and attention -- probably starting with new regulations. It also will mean additional competition. They may be sorry that they dabbled in the publisher's role. They didn't stay in their lane as a platform.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.
G

Guest-5ty5s4

Guest
Google owns YouTube, and they’re taking down videos and content for no apparent reason. It seems if it has Trump in it at all (even unbiased), they’re removing it. We are seriously living in a George Orwell or Aldous Huxley novel.

D45C5DDC-93E3-45AF-82EF-D9A3C793A7C3.png

They don’t want the “other side” to have the chance to speak or garner support in any way. And they’re not trying to hide that!
 

BizyDad

Keep going. Keep growing.
FASTLANE INSIDER
EPIC CONTRIBUTOR
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Summit Attendee
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
416%
Oct 7, 2019
2,885
11,989
Phoenix AZ
So a conversation about leveling the playing field of the internet, I thought this article about what the brave browser is doing is really interesting. They're trying to decentralize content. In other words, do away with servers hosting in data centers and spread the content out over nodes. Like bit torrents.

Out with http, in with ipfs. Brave is the first browser to support it.


This is potentially a big deal. A complete restructuring of the organization of the internet.

More on this:

More info on ipfs: Why The Internet Needs IPFS Before It’s Too Late – TechCrunch

What liability? They are covered as a platform under 230. They can't be sued for content. Seriously? So why did they do it now?
Section 230 protections are not limitless, requiring providers to still remove material illegal on a federal level.

I'm no lawyer, but I do know that these rioters are being charged with federal crimes and they used Parler to coordinate their alleged crimes.

I'm interested to see if Parler itself will be held liable legally or if Sec 230 applies to them. In my limited understanding I do not believe it does, which may be why they moved some operation offshore. Of course if it does happen, the right will scream further censorship.

Regardless, hopefully that addresses the question of liability.
 

Charnell

Block me if you're a quack
FASTLANE INSIDER
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
276%
Oct 12, 2014
1,091
3,009
Kansas City
I'm curious if the current outrage is simply because people agree with what's being said (or not said anymore lol) on these platforms or what. There wasn't a thread on here when Visa & Mastercard blocked usage of their cards on Pornhub last month. But then again, that's the adult industry and that goes against "values."
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.
G

Guest-5ty5s4

Guest
I'm curious if the current outrage is simply because people agree with what's being said (or not said anymore lol) on these platforms or what. There wasn't a thread on here when Visa & Mastercard blocked usage of their cards on Pornhub last month. But then again, that's the adult industry and that goes against "values."

Outrage is due to a violation of principles that make America, America.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kak
G

Guest-5ty5s4

Guest
Have you ever read the 1st amendment?

Yes. Have you? The Bill of Rights: A Transcription

I was a bit of a slacker in high school, never studied or did my homework, but I did get a perfect score on AP government just from being around political/history conversation all my life. (Got a 5, but didn't get credit for my other AP exams because I... never studied for any of them. Just winged it)

Ended up getting an engineering degree, but I sucked at math compared to government, reading, and writing.
 

Charnell

Block me if you're a quack
FASTLANE INSIDER
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
276%
Oct 12, 2014
1,091
3,009
Kansas City
Yes, I have. Studied it in college a bit, once upon a time. Freedom of speech, press, assembly, religion, and petition is from the government. Not privately owned businesses.

Let's create a hypothetical situation, here on this forum. One of the rules is "Respect: Leave foul language at home." I think we can all agree that is a great rule, keeps things civil.

Now, let's say, again hypothetically, I came into this thread and called you all sorts of names from "narrow-minded" to "an absolute F*cking moron" and attacking you with things like "you lack the mental bandwidth to critically think" and "you actually don't have thoughts, you only parrot what you see on tv." All things I would never say.

So @MJ DeMarco sees this and has two choices. Either 1: he bans my account, suppressing my voice, and according to you that's unamerican. Or 2: he allows me to continue attacking members, ignoring the rules he's set forth and thus setting a precedent that this is a lawless forum where anything goes. Soon the front page is nothing but advertisements for penis pills and forex systems.

Since no one has answered my question in my previous post about pedophiles: would you be comfortable knowing there was a popular website where pedophiles were allowed to openly talk about what they would do to children if they got their hands on them? If not, why are you defending a site where terrorists were allowed to openly talk about what they would do to politicians if they got their hands on them?

By keeping up a terrorist front is AWS, Google, Apple, wherever setting a precedent that they are a lawless company that allows anything to be on their servers?
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.
G

Guest-5ty5s4

Guest
Yes, I have. Studied it in college a bit, once upon a time. Freedom of speech, press, assembly, religion, and petition is from the government. Not privately owned businesses.
Full stop.

Rights are not from the government - you have them when you're born. They don't give them to you.

Tell me, how do you feel about the South when business owners denied service to customers of minority races?

Were they "just doing business?"

Oh! Maybe there are rights that we have...that need to be upheld!
 
  • Love
Reactions: Kak

Charnell

Block me if you're a quack
FASTLANE INSIDER
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
276%
Oct 12, 2014
1,091
3,009
Kansas City
Full stop.

Rights are not from the government - you have them when you're born. They don't give them to you.
Clearly, you haven't read the 1st amendment. The protection is from the government. Not GIVEN by the government, but protection from retaliation for speaking out against the government. That's what the "from" is. And funny enough, rights are given by the government too. You're not just born with them. You're born with them with the caveat that you're born within the confines of a country or country territory. A country with a government.

I beg of you, please understand what you're arguing in the future. Facts don't care about your feelings.

Tell me, how do you feel about the South when business owners denied service to customers of minority races?

Were they "just doing business?"

Oh! Maybe there are rights that we have...that need to be upheld!
At what point in time? Given a certain period, those minority races you speak of didn't have the rights they have today. But they were given those rights ... by the government. Thus preventing those business owners from denying service to people based on the color of their skin or ethnicity.


How do I feel about it? I don't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Post New Topic

Please SEARCH before posting.
Please select the BEST category.

Post new topic

Guest post submissions offered HERE.

Latest Posts

New Topics

Fastlane Insiders

View the forum AD FREE.
Private, unindexed content
Detailed process/execution threads
Ideas needing execution, more!

Join Fastlane Insiders.

Top