3 ms·
>>I for one want to hear his expertise, even if it disagrees with the conclusions you've already made. That's fine. YouTube doesn't want to host it, because in
by patmcc 5y ago
>>I for one want to hear his expertise, even if it disagrees with the conclusions you've already made.
That's fine. YouTube doesn't want to host it, because in their view it's harmful. What's the problem?
- tomohawk 5y agoYoutube is a monopoly. Monopolies must not be allowed to infringe on our rights.
- tw600040 5y agoSo if some restaurant business says X (gays, christians, asians etc) not welcome we don't want to host them, that's fine too?
- smorgusofborg 5y agoThe groups you cite are civil rights relevant. Do you think Rand Paul's thoughts are an expression of his religion or evidence of a handicap?
- lostdog 5y ago> Do you think Rand Paul's thoughts are...evidence of a handicap? They could be. Or do you just mean physical handicaps?
- evanrich 5y agoMask opinions are not a protected class
- setpatchaddress 5y agoYes, if you're actually a libertarian -- like Rand Paul claims to be -- that is in fact fine. People can vote with their feet. edit: typo
- patmcc 5y agoWe make a distinction between characteristics/traits and actions, generally. It's generally wrong to discriminate based on traits and fine to discriminate on actions. So; if YouTube said "we don't allow Christian white men" or whatever, absolutely, that's terrible and shouldn't be allowed. If they say "we don't allow people to say things that are actively harmful" that's quite different. If you go into a restaurant and insult the servers, or start bothering other patrons, they'll ask you to leave. That's perfectly fine.
- jimmygrapes 5y agoHow about if a man and woman kiss and are left alone but when two men kiss they are asked to leave for public indecency?
- patmcc 5y ago"Kissing" is the behavior, it should either be allowed or not. It's clearly wrong to have different rules depending on the gender of those involved.
- SpicyLemonZest 5y agoThis just seems very dismissive. Maybe you're right that Youtube's speech policies aren't an issue of earth-shattering importance, but that wouldn't mean it's somehow impossible to say that I don't like them and wish they would change.
- patmcc 5y agoPartially I'm serious, but I'm also channeling the politics of Rand Paul - a libertarian who doesn't believe in "rights based on your behavior" - which to him I suppose means the "behavior" of being gay or trans, rather than the behavior of saying idiotic things about covid.
- gwright 5y ago> That's fine. YouTube doesn't want to host it, because in their view it's harmful. What's the problem? It is perfectly rationale to say that YouTube has the freedom to make editorial choices while also pointing out that they are making bad choices. You aren't countering any criticism by stating that YouTube has the freedom to make those choices -- you're just changing the topic and ignoring the nature of the criticism.