2 ms·
You're arguing against a straw man. No one is saying "ban them for their thoughts", they are saying "ban them for inciting violence". (cue the desperate, too-c
by anthonyrstevens 6y ago
You're arguing against a straw man. No one is saying "ban them for their thoughts", they are saying "ban them for inciting violence".
(cue the desperate, too-cute-by-half arguments "but are they REALLY inciting violence?")
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Sohcahtoa82 6y agoYup. It's a bad faith argument, yet it's everywhere. I'd think HN would be better than that, yet here we are, having the same fight every time free speech is the topic. Also note that the parent mentioned "government action" whereas the GP is referring to a business taking action. The distinction is incredibly important, yet so many free-speech purists respond to corporate action as if it was a government action.