7 ms·

What right are you talking about here? There is no right to use a privately owned service in a way that scares off paying customers, much like you don't have

• CWuestefeld 16y ago
  There is no right to use a privately owned service in a way that scares off paying customers, much like you don't have the right to spray paint a swastika on your neighbor's house. This is perfectly correct, and I never claimed otherwise. As far as I can see, this part of the discussion was purely abstract, about whether the negative associations of the swastika so overwhelm other uses as to render the latter irrelevant. Indeed, the whole discussion would be irrelevant given your context. That is, in a conversation about how a property owner chooses to allow their property to be used, the only relevant point, legally and morally, is "this is how I choose to allow my property to be used". There need be no further explanation. Since the whole thing is dilatory in that context, the only meaningful interpretation is as an abstract discussion of why one might want to make such a distinction. In such a discussion, the idea of tolerating the thoughts of others -- not just those who might claim offense at seeing such speech, but also those who would like to profess their beliefs -- certainly has a place.