Like I said, I think "carriers" are important for plumbing-type infrastructure services. This includes phone companies and ISPs. It strains credulity to say tha

Like I said, I think "carriers" are important for plumbing-type infrastructure services. This includes phone companies and ISPs. It strains credulity to say that Facebook or a webhost falls under that same umbrella. You're assuming that networks are looking for an excuse, but plenty of network operators don't want to serve certain types of content. Making that illegal just means network operators are the ones being censored, rather than their users — except the penalty for disobedience is no longer simply finding another network, but fines and jail time. That does not strike me as an improvement. This also still doesn't answer my original question: if I as a business owner/network operator don't want to serve certain types of content, why does it then follow that I should be liable for everything I do serve?