The ACLU advocates for the spread of misinformation (as they should). They have advocated successfully for white supremacist nutjobs to spread their hate in all

The ACLU advocates for the spread of misinformation (as they should). They have advocated successfully for white supremacist nutjobs to spread their hate in all sorts of places. Other cases of the ACLU advocating for misinformation: 1. Lovell v. Griffin -- ACLU advocated for Jehovah's witnesses to spread published misinformation on city streets without any governmental intervention or approval needed. 2. Terminiello v. Chicago -- ACLU advocated on behalf of preacher who used falsehoods about Jews to stir anti-semitism 3. New York Times v. Sullivan -- ACLU advocated on behalf of the New York Times claiming they should be allowed to publish falsehoods, even if they constituted libel against an individual, unless those falsehoods were published with an actual intent to libel. 4. Prune Yard Shopping Center v. Robins -- particularly important. In this case, ACLU argued that even private property owners must allow free speech, when their property is basically public. Thus, facebook, like a mall, would be forced to allow all speech without restraint. So thank you for supporting the ACLU, but your support and your belief that facebook ought to restrict speech is incredibly at odds. That's like me contributing to the Trump campaign while thinking he's a buffoon. But, whatever.