Private, as in not .gov. But, make them bake the cake is your pov I see.
Sue for fraud, but don't go around and tell a business who to not censor or who to serve.
“Private, as in not .gov. But, make them bake the cake is your pov I see. Sue for fraud, but don’t go around and tell a business who to not censor or who to serve.”
I mean this in the nicest possible way, but something is truly very wrong with your mind. You come to a conservative forum and demonstrate you are hellbent on defending the pro-abortion, pro-sodomy liberals who run Facebook and accuse others of doing what you and they are doing.
How can you have two functioning brain cells and accuse me of siding with people who are forcing mom and pop bakery owners to make custom designs showing support for homosexual marriage? To accuse me of something like that while you are siding with tyrants who are doing EXACTLY what you accuse me of shows your complete and total lack of understanding of the issue.
When a person has something explained clearly to them and they persist in living in an alternative reality, it causes one to wonder if that person is a fraud or deranged.
When a company goes public, they make shares in the company available to the public for purchase. This means it is PUBLICLY owned (more commonly called publicly traded in order to differentiate from government owned), not privately owned.
Further, Facebook does not own the speech of those who use its forum.
When companies take advantage of government-regulated securities in order to have easy access to money in places like your and my retirement accounts, then it is no longer merely the free speech of the CEO (even if he owns 25%) or the executives who run it.
I realize you consider freedom of speech to be important, but you are applying a knee-jerk reaction to a situation about which you are in DESPERATE need of an education. But instead you are shouting from the rooftops your erroneous position.
It’s like you’ve made a mistake in math class, the teacher has explained your mistake, but you insist on repeating it and arguing over it. You are simply wrong about how the concept of freedom of speech should be applied to publicly traded entities. And by the way, it is not about me being the supposed teacher and you being the student in this scenario. It is about what the facts of the matter are. And you have them wrong.
If the executives who run Facebook want to control and limit legal speech in order to advance their own personal agendas, they need to buy the company and take it private. And they need to give full disclosure.
Your supposed remedy to their illegal activity is no remedy at all. Your idea to sue a multi-billion-dollar, multi-national corporation when the ones running it infringe on the free speech of individuals and small businesses and groups is ludicrous. It shows you have zero experience doing so.
A company like Facebook would have a team of lawyers running you through the court system and making you hate life itself. It takes the power of the government to regulate and enforce laws upon a behemoth such as this, which quite frankly should not be allowed to amass so much power in the first place.
If you go back and look at the writings of the founders, it is such unchecked power that they were concerned about. Free speech is not about some phrase you can quote rotely with no engagement in the practical application of it.
If you had a wild, unruly mob with guns gathering at a public park and disarming anyone there who was not part of their group, your position would be akin to saying the mob is just exercising their rights to own guns and have the freedom to assemble. Your remedy is like saying the families who are disarmed and harassed can go find another park to take their families and have their picnics.
No. That’s not how freedoms and rights work. The freedoms and rights of some do not negate the freedom and rights of others.
Facebook owners and executives have the right to exercise free speech. So does the public that they use for access to capital and to whom they market their goods and services. The free speech of the Facebook executives is not the freedom to rob others of their freedom of speech.
Facebook promoted its services to the general public with the premise and good faith understanding that it was an open forum to share links, thoughts, photos, videos, personal information like birth dates and special occasions being celebrated and schools attended. Facebook, under this premise, amassed billions in marketing revenue. Now that they have received good and valuable consideration from the participants, they have a legal and moral duty to fulfill their contractual agreements. Instead the ones running it have decided to wield their unchecked power to censor the free speech of conservatives and give in-kind contributions to liberal politicians. Facebook needs regulation. So does YouTube and other social media platforms that are publicly traded.
I don’t mean to sound harsh or hateful, but it is really annoying to engage in a conversation with someone on a conservative forum and be accused of supporting the homosexual agenda because I believe Facebook should be regulated. It is even more annoying when the person stubbornly refuses to consider the facts.
When you have two billion users you are not baking cakes in a small town.
When you have two billion users and you censor speech you are a world-wide menace.
When you have two billion users and sell their private data to the highest bidder you are evil and must be destroyed.
There is no compromise to be had with Facebook.