4 ms·

I'm glad to see this at the top of HN. If you aren't personally outraged by this, you should take a step back..try to be as objective as you possibly can...and

I'm glad to see this at the top of HN. If you aren't personally outraged by this, you should take a step back..try to be as objective as you possibly can...and consider what it really means. We are watching the collapse of the First Amendment. No matter how much we may hate what someone has to say, we should DEFEND the right for them to say it. That's a principle that makes this country what it is. Somehow this power must be reigned in.

fra 9y ago
What you are suggesting does not fall under the First Amendment, and indeed would be hugely freedom-denying. Private individuals and businesses have always had the right to (non-violently) restrict speech in their private spaces. As long as they do not victimize a protected class, private businesses may reserve the right not to serve anyone. Now, I am a statist so I am all for designating businesses as "essential infrastructure" and tightly regulating them. That being said, I'm not sure all the libertarian-types on HN would like it all that much.