4 ms·
You don't have the right to patronize a restaurant that gets shut down for health code violations after it's shut down. There's no difference in principle here.
by KerrAvon 2y ago
You don't have the right to patronize a restaurant that gets shut down for health code violations after it's shut down. There's no difference in principle here. Banning Twitter itself for failing to comply with the law isn't a free speech issue.
Now, part of the order makes it illegal to use VPN to access Twitter, which is an actual free speech issue, if you'd care to argue on those grounds.
- nickff 2y agoIsn’t the use of a VPN analogous to using a back door (alley entrance) to visit the condemned restaurant? What difference would there be in your analogy?
- gruez 2y ago>There's no difference in principle here. Banning Twitter itself for failing to comply with the law isn't a free speech issue. All the websites China bans are also ostensibly for "failing to comply with the law". Would you say those bans are also "not a free speech issue"?
- Qem 2y ago> Now, part of the order makes it illegal to use VPN to access Twitter, which is an actual free speech issue, if you'd care to argue on those grounds. This part was later struck down by the court.