RoeJaz
71124
1099
65
Remember that just because you are offended doesn't necessarily mean you are right.
Aug 17, 2017 4:53 PM
RoeJaz
71124
1099
65
Remember that just because you are offended doesn't necessarily mean you are right.
c00lh4nd
And in this is why the societies of UK, US, France, Germany, Sweden, Spain are broken. The minority shout down the Majority. Barcelona 17/08
SmolTenk
This raises a question though: What is internet access in this context? Is it a luxury? Or is it infrastructure by now.
Jupman
ISP, static IP address: Protected Host services: no I think anyone will see that line
chunkblaster
I don't think anyone is disputing that anymore, but what is being violated is *my right to be spoken to* by these people.
PizzaStation
There's no such right.
PrettyCesspool
How would I know if I agree/disagree with these "assholes" if they aren't allowed to speak to me because they've been silenced?
PizzaStation
True, but people are legitimately calling for government censorship right now.
BoredCreep
If only more progressives would internalize this.
ladybird2223
Favorited to be able to pull out later.
Ravenbreaker
Free speech though also means that you should not try to censor it in any way. If you make speech impossible you make violence inevitable.
BidonDhuile
The door is that way OP.
Spicymuffins89
I'm fine with this argument for the 1st amendment, it's just that people conflate the argument with flowery words like "freedom of speech"
Spicymuffins89
By which I mean the idea of freedom of speech rather than the legality of it.
sendmethemdickpics
I'm offended that my inbox is so empty
demobytom
Well, as always, there's XKCD for like every topic.
RoeJaz
Is this the source? Genuinely asking.
timber777
Since you asked... https://xkcd.com/1357/
N0ledge
It should extend to more than just government arresting you for what you say. Like losing your job for what you say is wrong. Unless its 1/2
N0ledge
an unwarranted insult. I mean if you disagree with someone you shouldn't fear to say something, I think it's the spirit of free speech
makabutu
That is true, but I will still oppose people being fired from their jobs or expelled from schools for speaking their minds.
tooomanysteves
Not crediting the course? That's a paddling.
edwardelricsnipples
I'm a little on the fence about the whole "get them fired from their job" part
Thekingofbeans
Yeah it's a tricky area. I think that needs to be handled on a case by case basis.
WaterblightGanon
if you're talking about the charlottesville nazis they absolutely deserved to be identified and fired. there needs to be consequences.
beergolem
Completely true, but some entities have an extremely large market share in public expression. This does raise concerns of their censorship.
PrettyCesspool
"Think your an asshole." Looks like I better be careful walking on these eggshells.
LyingSOB
It also means that you're driving the opinion underground where it can fester and become more potent. More,better,speech is the only answer.
Patch870
Absolutely true. I believe evil is irrational and will never stand up to open debate. I would much rather see it in the open and debated.
PizzaStation
Shine a light on it. Counter those in your family, friends,and communities who share those views. It's erased through love and education 1/2
PizzaStation
Social ostracization works far better than government censorship. 2/2
Somanyquestions
There comes a point where there is nothing more to say though. I'm sure they have heard every argument, they will not be persuaded by speech
severice
We don't debate hate to change the minds of those were debating. We generally do it to convince the undecided.
LyingSOB
THAT'S what it's about, really. To inoculate the susceptible and credulous.
JustHereToUpvoteThings
They will die off eventually...
Somanyquestions
I,m sure people in WW2 said that once it was over, yet here we are with a new generation.
JustHereToUpvoteThings
The must have breeded before they died.
BLONALD
"Fascism is bad. Except when we're the ones doing it." :^)
MenaceToSobriety
The word "fascism" is literally misused more than the word "literally."
LegendaryKatman
Antifa?
BLONALD
Yarp.
Thekingofbeans
I agree with what you're saying, but I don't think private groups doing this counts as fascism.
PizzaStation
There are a lot of people calling for government suppression of "hate speech" right now.
Thekingofbeans
Yes there are, but THIS is not one of those cases.
FourFiveFire
While you have a correct point, I fear the trend of shutting down real dialog via tantrums and threats.
spiffynidd
I was called a Nazi yesterday cause I believe in free speech (to a point). I don't like whats being said but I respect the right to say it.
TheSunless
So you must respect their right to call you a Nazi, then. Right?
PizzaStation
It's weird that those calling for gov censorship of "hate speech" don't recognize that suppression of speech in a fascist trademark.
PizzaStation
*is a
FourFiveFire
Being an adult mean letting people have diverse viewpoints, and engaging ideas rather that shutting down people.
FourFiveFire
'Your viewpoints are bad therefore you can't be a part of society" is a frightening trend, and its growing.
TheSunless
When your viewpoint is "Kill all people born a certain way" then it's bad and you can't be part of society.
Ellimem
What's going to come from allowing Nazis to speak? Polite acceptance that maybe all black people really should be lynched?
Satherian
Or the acceptance of their ideology, eventually leading to a rise in power?
GalacticToast17
And then there's the neo-Nazis...
Ellimem
Nazism isn't a bad viewpoint. It's destructive and hurtful to many people. It shouldn't be a part of society.
Morrigi
Too late. It is, and suppressing it is unconstitutional.
Ellimem
Oh no. What will I do being unshackled from a 240 year old piece of parchment?
eromitlab
The difference between free speech and freeze peach.
GreenFox
https://xkcd.com/license.html please post with attribution to the author
Samoosa
I find it weird how some people can jump to the defense of Nazi's but not gays and such
NotaClipaMagazine
It's possible to do both. I imagine you don't know what the people defending Nazis would do if gay people were being threatened.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
cyberspork
Boycotting something I don't like is my first amendment right.
ffilm
The "only" reason for a lack of audience - -> SOME (too many) people don't like it.
cyberspork
Yea, its totally ok. Its not up to you or the govt to detrermine if a tv show is cancelled
[deleted]
[deleted]
cyberspork
It's not
justanotherguy135
Free speech means all of those things though. You have a right to speak to wherever and whenever you want.
fletchfletch
Nope. Your right to free speech does not oblige anyone to give you a platform to say what you want.
gecko08
No. You don't.
aGrumpyPotato
Yes, and others have a right to tell the speaker's to go fuck themselves. The counterprotests weren't any less constitutional than the 1/?
aGrumpyPotato
White supremacist rally, yet the latter whine that the former "trampled on their free speech" and then run them over. 2/2
PrettyCesspool
Yes, but not assault them based on their beliefs. If it's ok punch a fascist, then it's ok to punch communist.
cyberspork
One side actually calls for the extermination of a group of people....one side doesn't. If you can't see the difference there, IDK
PrettyCesspool
It seems like your defending communism which is responsible for more deaths than my precious Hitler. If it's ok to punch a fascist....;)
ErnestDoodler
100% agree. But... can you deny someone service because you don't like their politics/beliefs? Including internet?
MenaceToSobriety
I think that depends what service you're referring to.
OmNachoMama
Hosting companies are a business. This could be an opportunity for a new one targeted at far right organizations.
airen
If its a private mc server n they being racist yea foking cunts
VoidIncarnate
Yes, you have right to free association as long as you are not infringing a protected class. 1st Amendment.
MaxwellMurder87
I would say yes. Ethically it's not right and in a free market economy those businesses will eventually fail from intolerance
Jupman
You can make your own server, get a static IP, and you can make your own site.
whatupmyknitters
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/the-right-to-refuse-service-can-a-business-refuse-service-to-someone-because-of-appearance
ApplesdaKitty
If the service you provide is given through private interests only, then yes. Otherwise no. Public services should be for all.
boomchacle
yes... like how most fast food places have a sign that says that they have the right to refuse service to anyone.
ReverseTrapTsukasa
If you are using a product or service to deny or impact others' safety or rights, they can deny a product or service. Utilities are
ReverseTrapTsukasa
different only to the point where they are considered necessities. Internet and excessive electrical use are not necessities, but are
ReverseTrapTsukasa
services. In this day and age, if a person does not have personal access to internet, there are accessibility option, especially for people
ReverseTrapTsukasa
seeking work or doing research at libraries. Beyond that internet use is a luxury. My opinion stated here is a luxury I enjoy. I understand
ReverseTrapTsukasa
that you have every right to reply, deny, ignore, agree, or argue against me. I do not have the right to deny your rights or safety. Please
PleasantPeasantPheasant
Yes. if you own a service you reserve the right to refuse anyone.
SiameseCitys
Not protected classes. Discrimination is still illegal
UnpopularOpinionsGuy
No private business should be governmentally forced to cater to any individual or group it wishes to deny goods or services.
RoseTheSpecialEdTeacher
Anything is legal as long as the peoole in power says it is.
QuietCorgi
If its your private business you can reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. And discontinue service at anytime.
tehzpoon
Until you start discriminating against people based on race, creed, age, sex, ability, or physical attributes.
QuietCorgi
There is backlash sure but its not illegal.
LvAllen
You really can't though. The Heart of Atlanta motel claimed it could. The Supreme Court said "Nope!"
THRAWN18
Free speech also doesn't count when you are trying to incite violence with it. One could argue that was what these white supremacists want
NotaClipaMagazine
And what do you think Antifa are doing?
THRAWN18
Last I checked, it was a white supremacist who murdered a woman and ran down several other people.
NotaClipaMagazine
BOTH of them are doing it. Don't defend either.
THRAWN18
Feel free to show me where one of the white supremacists was run down with a car. Until you do, your argument is invalid. Give me facts.
Superfuntime
If an ideology has a history of 6 million people dead then maybe it's just reasonable that people don't want it to spread again.
chetmanleyjr
If an ideology has a history of 100 million people dead then maybe it's just reasonable that people don't want it to spread again.
Superfuntime
When and what ideology?
Superfuntime
Oh wait i get it. You're trying to make the conversation about communism. A longer time span and no recent threats mean nothing. Moron..
Superfuntime
As if the nazis regularly flooding streets to spread mindless hate and lies isn't something to worry about because communism exists. Moron..
SiameseCitys
Yup, "beliefs" are not a protected class, especially when they're shitty beliefs that infringe on people's rights.
hipgrandma
Public Accommodations (libs, hotels, etc.) cant. Private clubs can. I think internet is public (or should be) but servers arent. If no one 1
hipgrandma
wants to host your ideas, you can get your own server and anyone that wants can access it. No one can be forced to distribute your ideas 2
hipgrandma
if they do not want to. Like a newspaper doesnt have to print your letter to the editor. Papers and websites are not public accommodations 3
Beepity
The Republicans are current in control of the Legislative branch of the government, and haven't determined internet usage to be a utility1/2
Beepity
So, really, this is just the invisible hand of the free market at work. 2/2
xlr82xs
Also, internet usage is a different thing to hosting content on the internet.
IUpvoteBoxes
Yeah. It is. You have a right to be a disgusting creep on your own property. Everywhere else you are merely being given permission.
ThePickle
I think a private company or business owner should be able to deny service to anyone for any reason, but they have to own it
ThePickle
When I said own it, I meant they should have to state the reason they are denying service. Publicly.
OmNachoMama
They have terms and conditions when you join or sign up. If you violate them, they can terminate your service.
HEXADECIMAL
This isn't tru or integration never would have happened.
ThePickle
Or would have happened slower, true. But now isn't then. Or is it....
causality
I don't see anything in the Constitution that allows the government to force a private company to do business with someone it doesn't like.
eion85
The 1964 Civil Rights Act is still constitutional as far as the courts are concerned.
ThePickle
That's kind of where I fall on the subject, yes. Plus, I wouldn't want to be forced to bake a cake for a nazi wedding, you know?
eion85
So we should repeal the 1964 civil rights act?
ThePickle
Maybe on a temp basis, see how it goes
ThePickle
I'm just saying, wouldn't it be nice if we didn't need ot anymore? Only one way to find out...
eion85
If we don't need it, then having it doesn't hurt anybody. It isn't a barrier to activity unless you plan to violate it.
HumorLeech
Your ip shouldn't have that right, no. However, hosting sites absolutely should have that right. It's like the KKK renting an event hall.
Somanyquestions
Is it different to refuse to rent a venue to KKK or for a gay wedding?
HumorLeech
We're not arguing for morals, we're arguing the extent of the venue's rights. They have the right to deny gay couples, too, if they want.
Somanyquestions
Can they also deny black people?
HumorLeech
You know, given the tone of your questions, I don't think you care about the conversation as much as you care about causing conflict.
HumorLeech
The simple answer to this and any other question you ask is probably yes. Private companies have thw right to deny service for ANY reason.
CwmMakesPeopleCryInScrabble
Did the gays start advocating killing the straights to purify the bloodline? That'll get awkward fast.
Somanyquestions
It was an honest question. So it's ok with refuse service if we disagree with their idea or if we are scared?
HumorLeech
I understand what you're going for, but as was pointed out; A gay couple isn't pushing for violence and intolerance.
CwmMakesPeopleCryInScrabble
There's a fundamental difference in the things you're comparing, is my point. More appropriate comparison: denying KKK v denying a group>
JustHereToUpvoteThings
The internet service itself shouldn't be denied. But internet sites should be allowed to deny service.
DrYoloMcSwagmasterIIIEsq
Should phone companies be able to shut down service to people with politics that they disagree with? I would argue that certain social (1)
DrYoloMcSwagmasterIIIEsq
media companies hold enough of a communication monopoly that barring them from their site would be the same as barring their phone lines (2)
whatupmyknitters
"shouldn't" is one thing. but "is it currently legal in the US to do that?" sounds more like what ErnestDoodler was asking.
JustHereToUpvoteThings
If it's within the site's terms of service, I would assume it's legal. Unless their terms go against some other law.
Eogos
Websites can totally tell you to fuck off. It's 100% legal
severice
Nope, if you say that's ok, then we can make Facebook whites only. Or imgur no gays allowed.
JustHereToUpvoteThings
If Facebook was whites-only, do you really think it would have gotten as popular as it is?
RoeJaz
My instinct says no to denying utilities. I suppose there is an argument that a company should be able to refuse service, but I would 1/2
RoeJaz
have to think about it. 2/2
whatupmyknitters
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/the-right-to-refuse-service-can-a-business-refuse-service-to-someone-because-of-appearance
whatupmyknitters
--political affiliation doesn't seem to be a protected group, but also public utilities (water) =/= internet, and not having internet conn--
whatupmyknitters
--ection at your home can (i'd think) be justified because you could go to a library or something if you really needed it.
HarborLegend
I think the general idea here is that yeah sure why not, someone will have a business model based on selling to otherwise boycotted people
MoaConstrictor
I feel like there's an important distinction between 'essential services' and other here - essentials can't (shouldn't?) be denied to anyone
hipgrandma
denying internet access isnt the same thing as refusing to publish something on your sever
tinyfootprints
This one is a sticky wicket. Can people host their own sites if no provider wants them?
xlr82xs
Yes. But then you get into the ability vs possibility argument.
MadCatIV
It's not terribly hard to setup a computer at your home and serve a web page from it. Though you have to avoid any TOS issues with the ISP.
MadCatIV
But don't expect it to withstand the onslaught from activist hackers and whatnot
sittingherethinkingthinkingimsittingherelisteningtoyou
No shirt. No shoes. No service. Business owners have rights. Utility services however are bound by "duty to serve". But can be denied for 1
sittingherethinkingthinkingimsittingherelisteningtoyou
cause (nonpayment....) What to Do When Utility Service Has Been Disconnected https://www.nclc.org/.../cc_when_utility_service_is_disconnect
ReverseTrapTsukasa
The "No shirt. No shoes. No service." is a rule that is intended to protect store and customer. If it is not followed, the customer is
ReverseTrapTsukasa
neglecting their own safety and the safety of others. Businesses can only create rules for customers, when customer rights or safety are at
ReverseTrapTsukasa
risk. If not, they'd be able to make any asinine rules they so desired to deny service based on old criteria of discrimination.