4 ms·
> Ok, I get it. You're against free speech. Another day, another person confusing 'free speech' with a private publisher not wanting to publish hate speech. Y
by mullingitover 5y ago
> Ok, I get it. You're against free speech.
Another day, another person confusing 'free speech' with a private publisher not wanting to publish hate speech.
You're entitled to print what you want, you're not entitled to force someone else to print anything.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- fortran77 5y agoI said was I couldn’t find another place that would host it. I didn’t say that Reddit didn’t have a right to remove it.
- barbacoa 5y ago>>you're not entitled to force someone else to print anything. Unless you're the surgeon general. Then you can force private companies to publish compelled speech on their alcohol and tobacco products.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- mullingitover 5y agoThat was a very acceptable tradeoff for the makers of those products - I'm pretty sure they're rather print reasonable warnings than just have their products, which are indisputably health hazards, banned entirely.
- test542 5y agoNo one is printing anything.
- CRConrad 5y agoYeah, because you're perfectly willing to accept that your "free speech!" can't compel someone else to operate their printing press for you... But a server on the Internet is such a totally different thing, for sure! IOW: This ancient figure of speech is used precisely to show that the issue is exactly the same old one that has been thoroughly hashed out for centuries.