Thanks, anti-vax movement...

[Guest Mores]

On 3/15/2019 at 9:11 AM, MormonGator said:

I'm not thrilled about it either, but Twitter and Facebook are private companies. If they want to ban anti-vaxxers I'm not going to cry, given how damaging their views are. 

In other matters I'd agree with you.  But we are currently under a system where we have one political side benefiting from the current mentality and the other side being pounced.

Example: It is entirely up to a commercial establishment (such as the bed and breakfast) denying services to some people -- and they are being forced by courts to serve them. Liberals win because the government forces them into the non-consensual commercial exchange.

To balance it out and be FAIR, then social media platforms must also be forced into non-consensual commercial exchange for people they don't want to give a voice to.

The baker thing is not in this same category.  The thin line they walked was that they were happy to provide certain services.  But they would not provide those services.  They got around the law essentially by saying "Wedding cakes with two men (or two men's names) on them is not in our list of products we provide.  But we're happy to provide any of our available services to these same customers."

[NeuroTypical]

In the interests of furthering the discussion, I present this, which on it's surface would appear to be a point against the stand I've taken in this thread.

https://www.change.org/p/amazon-com-reverse-amazon-s-decision-to-censor-alternative-views-on-homosexuality?recruiter=561647429&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_initial&utm_term=psf_combo_share_message&recruited_by_id=40192240-3a81-11e6-baa3-c97190387063&utm_content=fht-16548667-en-us%3Av2&use_react=false