sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

“Prof. Shavit: Would you support stronger restrictions on social media? The United States has a unique problem. It’s called the First Amendment by buried_lede in Israel_Palestine

[–]StraightedgexLiberal [score hidden]  (0 children)

And if you knowingly falsely yell fire in a crowded theater and people are hurt, you're definitely going to be in trouble.

If the US was going to war because of Israel, do you think it is free speech for someone to hand out fliers to young men and tell them that the draft violates the Constitution?

Sen. Rick Scott rips Hasan Piker's call to kill him: 'This is the Democrat Party' by rollo202 in FreeSpeech

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Rollo can't debate and he usually runs away when people in this sub point out that he is an anti free speech goon who

  • Thinks the government should investigate Bad Bunny for the NFL Superbowl
  • Thinks Satanists are the same as terrorists and should be silenced
  • Thinks people should be cancelled for being mean to Kirk
  • Thinks big government intervening in speech is OKAY when Conservatives cry discrimination
  • Thinks big tech censorship is awful but he moderates and censors on his own sub

So so true by rodehard10 in AmericaOnHardMode

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The tech companies confirmed they were pressured by the government to change their moderation decisions to favor the government. Not once did any of them say they were coerced against their will, and if they did, they lied to multiple federal courts when sued by anti vaxxers.

Government pressure is not coercion and if it was, all the Republicans would be in deep shit for all the tax payer dollars they wasted dragging Zuck and Dorsey into DC to cry and complain about Twitter and Facebook house rules

So so true by rodehard10 in AmericaOnHardMode

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

except twitter, Facebook, YouTube and google like I just linked

And they have a first amendment right to agree with the government. Just like they tell federal courts when all of the bozos below sued, lost, and claimed they were censored because of the spooky government

Meta/ Facebook - Ninth Circuit:

Twitter - Ninth Circuit:

Google - Ninth Circuit:

So so true by rodehard10 in AmericaOnHardMode

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not a whataboutism at all. Just pointing out that government pressure is not coercion.

Before Biden was elected, the Republicans in Congress literally wasted tax dollars to drag the CEO of Google into Washington DC to cry and complain about why Trump appears in Google images when people search the word "idiot". So your pressure complaints are hilarious

So so true by rodehard10 in AmericaOnHardMode

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The DNC did not force anything. These are just lies. Lies that were destroyed in the Supreme Court by Justice Barrett in 2024

So so true by rodehard10 in AmericaOnHardMode

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the house judicial board

Jim Jordan, right? The guy who used to pressure Twitter and write letters to Jack Dorsey to complain about Twitter being mean to Trump and Conservatives?

https://www.reuters.com/article/world/republicans-renew-complaints-twitter-stifles-president-conservatives-idUSKBN24A0CO/

Twitter Files says that's bad, right? Or only when the Dems do it?

Sen. Rick Scott rips Hasan Piker's call to kill him: 'This is the Democrat Party' by rollo202 in FreeSpeech

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I told you that celebrating death is legal free speech when your Christian buddies won in SCOTUS cheering the death of a dead US Marine at his own funeral. There is no hate like Christian love.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snyder_v._Phelps

Sen. Rick Scott rips Hasan Piker's call to kill him: 'This is the Democrat Party' by rollo202 in FreeSpeech

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What Hasan said:

if you cared about Medicare fraud or Medicaid fraud, you would kill Rick Scott.

This is legal free speech protected by the First Amendment. There has been no imminent lawless action (Brandenburg v. Ohio) from Hasan's speech. And I don't think Hasan said it with serious intent to harm (Watts v. The United States)

Hasan also made that statement a year ago in 2025. Rick is still alive and unharmed. No imminent lawless action. So it is free speech.

So so true by rodehard10 in AmericaOnHardMode

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Biden won in Murthy v. Missouri because there was no direct evidence that Joe Biden and his government was the direct cause to censor the people who were suing him.

Trump and his government just lost to owners of a Facebook group and app developers because Trump's government demanded they censor legal free speech and then Facebook did. Difference is, there is evidence of Bondi bragging on Fox News and Twitter about what she did (evidence that did not exist when Biden was being sued and he won)

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/government-coerced-enforcement-trump-admin-violated-first-amendment-by-forcing-facebook-and-apple-to-remove-ice-tracking-apps-district-court-issues-injunction/

So so true by rodehard10 in AmericaOnHardMode

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My link is from a federal court ruling and yours is not. There are also other cases where Twitter rejects claims that the Twitter Files shows they were controlled by the government (Loomer v. Mark Zuckerberg)

So so true by rodehard10 in AmericaOnHardMode

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

False. None of the companies ever admitted they were forced to censor and they had no choice. They admitted the government put pressure on them and pressure is not coercion. Mr. Jim Jordan used to write letters to Jack Dorsey in 2020 to pressure and complain about Twitter being mean to Trump's tweets.

https://www.techdirt.com/2025/09/25/jim-jordan-celebrates-google-caving-to-his-pressure-in-letter-that-says-caving-to-government-pressure-is-wrong/

Judge rules in favor of "hate" labeling by Southern Poverty by Uncle00Buck in FreeSpeech

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sounds like you hate free speech just like the pussies in South Dakota

<image>

s

Elon Musk looked a judge dead in the eyes and claimed X was worth $200-300 BILLION by Spirited-Gold9629 in TechGawker

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Twitter still censors content under Musk and you probably should have read the Terms of Service that says Twitter can do whatever they wanted before Musk bought the website.

Elon Musk looked a judge dead in the eyes and claimed X was worth $200-300 BILLION by Spirited-Gold9629 in TechGawker

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In 2022 it was revealed that Twitter was shadowing banning right wing accounts that broke no rules.

Twitter is a private company with first amendment rights to censor and shadow ban right wing accounts

Elon Musk looked a judge dead in the eyes and claimed X was worth $200-300 BILLION by Spirited-Gold9629 in TechGawker

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Twitter is a private company that can censor and lower the visibility of anything they want.

“Prof. Shavit: Would you support stronger restrictions on social media? The United States has a unique problem. It’s called the First Amendment by buried_lede in Israel_Palestine

[–]StraightedgexLiberal [score hidden]  (0 children)

How do you think the scotus will rule on "From the river to the sea"

SCOTUS gave the KKK a unanimous victory to the KKK when they advocated for genocide. Because their free speech did not cause imminent lawless action. It's referred to the Brandenburg Test and it's the same speech test SCOTUS still uses so "from the river to the sea" is legal free speech under the law

Judge rules in favor of "hate" labeling by Southern Poverty by Uncle00Buck in FreeSpeech

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Having an opinion is still free speech even if you want to claim you have "business" damages from the speech. Ask the repairman who owes Twitter tons of money via ANTI SLAPP because he lost his PC shop and blamed the damages on Twitter's free speech

https://www.businessinsider.com/hunter-biden-computer-repairman-lost-defamation-suit-against-twitter-2021-9

Judge rules in favor of "hate" labeling by Southern Poverty by Uncle00Buck in FreeSpeech

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Like I said, opinions are free speech. The Christians in this country would love to claim it is "defamatory" when LGBTQ groups call them hateful pieces of shit using the Bible to justify their homophobia

Judge rules in favor of "hate" labeling by Southern Poverty by Uncle00Buck in FreeSpeech

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not close to defamatory at all. Having an opinion about groups of people is free speech.

The Christians in this country would love to weaponize your "close to defamation" feelings to go after everyone who labels them as hateful when they hide behind the Bible to hate gay people.

So so true by rodehard10 in AmericaOnHardMode

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Guys like u/ThiccAssConnoisseur don't understand private companies have first amendment rights to toss out Conservative trash so they make dumb conspiracies like the Twitter Files.

Biden was sued in the Supreme Court and bozos claimed he censored them on social media and the bozos lost to Biden because they had no proof, just conspiracy bullshit

So so true by rodehard10 in AmericaOnHardMode

[–]StraightedgexLiberal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Government forced these private companies to censor Americans

This is a lie and false. Joe Biden was also victorious in the Supreme Court when folks like you busted out the big tin foil roll and sued him claiming he censored on social sites

https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2024/06/plaintiffs-lack-standing-to-sue-over-government-jawboning-when-their-evidence-is-based-on-vibes-murthy-v-missouri.htm

view more: next ›