AOC says that censorship is necessary

originally posted by: pianopraze
a reply to: spacedoubt

There are constant lies coming out 24/7 from main stream media.

I ignore it.

If you like their lies doesn’t change that they are lies.

They are striving to shut down all discussion so no one can point out their lies.

They are already the number one enemy of Americans, even without government legally telling them what to censor.

Big changes coming to the US mainstream media next year, if Donald Trump wins.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: spacedoubt

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: spacedoubt

I ask this because it pertains. . .

You'd never give an 11-year-old a firearm to own because that would be irresponsible, correct?

You'd never allow an 11-year-old to purchase tobacco products because that would be irresponsible, correct?

If you agree with that, then what justification would you have for providing adult sexual material to an 11-year-old?

I had my first firearm at 9, a shotgun.
I still have it. And the rifle I got at 11.
Do you consider sexual education (reproductive biology)
Adult sexual material? I guess that’s the real issue, isn’t it?

I'm shocked that they sold them to a child.

Dad paid for it, and some of my allowance.
However, I went with him for many weeks in a row, to a gun safety course.
I had to pass, or no guns. I shot my first 12 gauge there. My should still hurts. Lol

originally posted by: spacedoubt

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: spacedoubt

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: spacedoubt

I ask this because it pertains. . .

You'd never give an 11-year-old a firearm to own because that would be irresponsible, correct?

You'd never allow an 11-year-old to purchase tobacco products because that would be irresponsible, correct?

If you agree with that, then what justification would you have for providing adult sexual material to an 11-year-old?

I had my first firearm at 9, a shotgun.
I still have it. And the rifle I got at 11.
Do you consider sexual education (reproductive biology)
Adult sexual material? I guess that’s the real issue, isn’t it?

I'm shocked that they sold them to a child.

Dad paid for it, and some of my allowance.
However, I went with him for many weeks in a row, to a gun safety course.
I had to pass, or no guns. I shot my first 12 gauge there. My should still hurts. Lol

So it was an individual, parental decision. Not one you chose on your own.

Got it!

originally posted by: SteamyAmerican

originally posted by: spacedoubt

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: spacedoubt

I ask this because it pertains. . .

You'd never give an 11-year-old a firearm to own because that would be irresponsible, correct?

You'd never allow an 11-year-old to purchase tobacco products because that would be irresponsible, correct?

If you agree with that, then what justification would you have for providing adult sexual material to an 11-year-old?

I had my first firearm at 9, a shotgun.
I still have it. And the rifle I got at 11.
Do you consider sexual education (reproductive biology)
Adult sexual material? I guess that’s the real issue, isn’t it?

How about sexual material at all?

Reproductive information is a euphemism for what is being shared in classrooms now.

I mean do you think in CA schools should be able to keep the gender identity of students hidden? Is this low just?

Or how about letting 5 year olds change their sex with surgery.

How about dropping the dime to CPS when the parents disagree with the child’s stance?

But yeah.

Guns, alcohol, tobacco, voting, tattoos, and Free Speech are the real issues.

Could Jewish man that owned a deli refuse to serve a man with a swastika tattoo?

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: network dude

In the public discourse. Yes we should allow free speech.

But, here is the dilemma. If someone is knowingly spewing disinformation in order to try to skew an election in a candidates favor. Is that still considered free speech? What if someone is unknowingly or knowingly paid by Russia to spew disinformation. Do we allow that? Where do we draw the line between public discourse and or disinformation/foreign interference?

So CNN, FOX, CBS and ABC are still here and you will notice most of those, including FOX sometimes, are actually full of commie ideas.

Should we ban News agencies we have proof they lied?

Ya know what I change my mind.

Every politician that is found to be lying or spreading misinformation about their opponents or opponents supporters must now be stripped of their public servitude, title, AND pay.

Then promptly be tarred and feathered on live tv.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: spacedoubt

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: spacedoubt

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: spacedoubt

I ask this because it pertains. . .

You'd never give an 11-year-old a firearm to own because that would be irresponsible, correct?

You'd never allow an 11-year-old to purchase tobacco products because that would be irresponsible, correct?

If you agree with that, then what justification would you have for providing adult sexual material to an 11-year-old?

I had my first firearm at 9, a shotgun.
I still have it. And the rifle I got at 11.
Do you consider sexual education (reproductive biology)
Adult sexual material? I guess that’s the real issue, isn’t it?

I'm shocked that they sold them to a child.

Dad paid for it, and some of my allowance.
However, I went with him for many weeks in a row, to a gun safety course.
I had to pass, or no guns. I shot my first 12 gauge there. My should still hurts. Lol

So it was an individual, parental decision. Not one you chose on your own.

Got it!

No, I asked for it. The gun. I wanted a shorter barrel.
I was only 9 and the longer barrel kept impaling the ground when we were trekking through the woods.

a reply to: spacedoubt

Christians sell a gay man a cake because he wanted to buy cake.

They didn’t want to write on it what gay man wanted, but they still did sell the cake.

Left did every thing they could to destroy that business for not writing on the cake.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: network dude

In the public discourse. Yes we should allow free speech.

But, here is the dilemma. If someone is knowingly spewing disinformation in order to try to skew an election in a candidates favor. Is that still considered free speech? What if someone is unknowingly or knowingly paid by Russia to spew disinformation. Do we allow that? Where do we draw the line between public discourse and or disinformation/foreign interference?

So CNN, FOX, CBS and ABC are still here and you will notice most of those, including FOX sometimes, are actually full of commie ideas.

Should we ban News agencies we have proof they lied?

Which one is the commiest?
And how do you define a commie idea?
Healthcare? Taking care of veterans?
Public education? Fixing infrastructure?
Taxing billionaires at a rate equal to middle class rates,
Unions that don’t let employers walk all over workers?

originally posted by: pianopraze
a reply to: spacedoubt

Christians sell a gay man a cake because he wanted to buy cake.

They didn’t want to write on it what gay man wanted, but they still did sell the cake.

Left did every thing they could to destroy that business for not writing on the cake.

Ok, what about what I asked?
Does the Nazi get a delicious brisket sandwich?

a reply to: pianopraze

The Left consists of power hungry egotistical maniacs.

That's why they couldn't simply go shop and get the cake they wanted somewhere else, like conservative people do.

Those type of people must be marginalized... To put it mildly.

a reply to: spacedoubt

Don’t know. Supreme Court decision didn’t cover that.

But he can refuse draw a swastika on it.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: pianopraze

AOC along with several other members of Congress are “looking into” ways of “reining in the media environment.” She says that censorship is necessary “so that you can’t just spew disinformation.” Who made her the arbiter of the truth? They’re coming for X.

Twitter video link

Democrats, I once knew you.

Hippies, forever young,

Freedom of expression till Kingdom come.

Now that’s all done.

Remember when Democrats were once persecuted in the hundreds across myriad industries for their alleged ties to communism? It was called the "red scare".

And then there was McCarthyism. Fear of immigration and Russian collusion.

What are they calling it this time? I forget.

It is apparent now as 20/20 hindsight is, that the McCarthy data was true. The facts are the plan has been in place for decades before the Civil War.

a reply to: spacedoubtNot sure. Good question. Are religious veiwpoints more important than political ones is what you’re asking? Right?

I don’t agree with her politics or even personal pov.

But here is a current example of the media lying….
the smear campaign against Rashida Tlaib is outlandish as it is false.

Look it up.

To answer your question with a question, if someone doesn’t serve a Jewish person at their bar or restaurant is the backlash loud, immediate, and drowns out the point of your hypothetical?

What is legal is not always right or moral. And my opinion with what the First Amendment (or any of them) says it irrelevant.

So again I defer to my original statement that I will support your racist statements by defending your ability to say them. No more no less.

Because I champion Free Speech. Not points of view.

originally posted by: pianopraze
a reply to: spacedoubt

Christians sell a gay man a cake because he wanted to buy cake.

They didn’t want to write on it what gay man wanted, but they still did sell the cake.

Left did every thing they could to destroy that business for not writing on the cake.

Crazy, they’re for censorship until someone censors them over verbiage they feel they needed to censor in order to maintain their moral beliefs and standards which in return gets them censored and cancelled. Makes perfect sense to me😳

originally posted by: spacedoubt
What if we know that information is Russian sourced from known entities ?
Troll farms for example. Specifically designed to cause informational disarray(?
How should we handle it?

Where do we obtain a truthful source to just "know it is right"?

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: spacedoubt
What if we know that information is Russian sourced from known entities ?
Troll farms for example. Specifically designed to cause informational disarray(?
How should we handle it?

Where do we obtain a truthful source to just "know it is right"?

According to AOC and people like her?

I’m guessing the news.

Hahahahahaha!

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: spacedoubt

I ask this because it pertains. . .

You'd never give an 11-year-old a firearm to own because that would be irresponsible, correct?

You'd never allow an 11-year-old to purchase tobacco products because that would be irresponsible, correct?

If you agree with that, then what justification would you have for providing adult sexual material to an 11-year-old?

You'd never give an 11-year-old a firearm to own because that would be irresponsible, correct

Wow , does that mean those 4/10's we had as kids to target practice and shoot squirrels is bad too?

.22's we had were one shots, and I guess that tells you how old I am. I am from Tennessee, and as children we played with those as a right of passage. BB's and Pellet guns and then the real stuff.

Nobody had a Hand gun then but our parents.

a reply to: SteamyAmerican

I don't see that at all. Not F'k all how that all works!

What I see, in the picture is staged liberal propaganda, perpetuated by the liberal media for the purposes of creating an emotion.

You may see this as a joke, but remember, it was not presented as a "joke" by the MSM. NO, they presented it as AOC being shattered by the same policies HER OWN PARTY made happen. What BS!!

Perhaps I have misunderstood your post, but I think not. So, you have my response...

BULLSH!T!!!

originally posted by: spacedoubt

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: spacedoubt

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: spacedoubt

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: spacedoubt

I ask this because it pertains. . .

You'd never give an 11-year-old a firearm to own because that would be irresponsible, correct?

You'd never allow an 11-year-old to purchase tobacco products because that would be irresponsible, correct?

If you agree with that, then what justification would you have for providing adult sexual material to an 11-year-old?

I had my first firearm at 9, a shotgun.
I still have it. And the rifle I got at 11.
Do you consider sexual education (reproductive biology)
Adult sexual material? I guess that’s the real issue, isn’t it?

I'm shocked that they sold them to a child.

Dad paid for it, and some of my allowance.
However, I went with him for many weeks in a row, to a gun safety course.
I had to pass, or no guns. I shot my first 12 gauge there. My should still hurts. Lol

So it was an individual, parental decision. Not one you chose on your own.

Got it!

No, I asked for it. The gun. I wanted a shorter barrel.
I was only 9 and the longer barrel kept impaling the ground when we were trekking through the woods.

Again, (pedantic) your father had to do the actual purchase.

Correct?