Republicans vs Disney Free Speech

[CivilDiscourse]

Yes, I'm against harming children - I guess you are not...

Spoken like those who want to silence people for "Racist views"

[Gondwanaland]

I'm not saying that Disney should not be able to expand. I'm saying that if they keep wanting to harm children and undermine parental control they should lose their SPECIAL privileges. Why should the state support those privileges?

They're not harming children or undermining parental control. They exercised their free speech, at the request of their employees, to criticize a state action. And now they're being punished by the government for their speech. That's fascist and a violation of the First amendment.

It wasn't acceptable when San Antonio banned Chick-fil-A from building in the airport due to their free speech wrt homosexuality, it wasnt acceptable when NY laemakers tried to ban CFA from building at rest stops for their free speech, It wasn't acceptable when CalPoly (a public state university) literally kicked an extant CFA off of its campus for its free speech, and it's certainly not acceptable now for Florida to behave in the same manner.

[rogue06]

They're not harming children or undermining parental control. They exercised their free speech, at the request of their employees, to criticize a state action. And now they're being punished by the government for their speech. That's fascist and a violation of the First amendment.

It wasn't acceptable when San Antonio banned Chick-fil-A from building in the airport due to their free speech wrt homosexuality, it wasnt acceptable when NY laemakers tried to ban CFA from building at rest stops for their free speech, It wasn't acceptable when CalPoly (a public state university) literally kicked an extant CFA off of its campus for its free speech, and it's certainly not acceptable now for Florida to behave in the same manner.

Minor point of contention... just like some proposed to strip Delta and Coke of sweetheart deals, that is (at least as of yet) all that has been done in Florida. It has been proposed. That's in sharp contrast to what happened to Chick-Fil-A where the various local government actually did prohibit them.

[seer]

Spoken like those who want to silence people for "Racist views"

When I was growing up we still had laws against most pornography - do YOU believe that those laws were a violation of free speech?

[seer]

They're not harming children or undermining parental control....

That is exactly what Disney is doing - they want to over turn the law and will do it through the courts if possible....

[Gondwanaland]

That is exactly what Disney is doing - they want to over turn the law and will do it through the courts if possible....

No, it is not. They are exercising their constitutional right to free speech at the request of their employees. And if you're too much of a coward to address the rest of my post and have to resort to Hypatia-esque quotemining, then it's clear you have no argument

[CivilDiscourse]

When I was growing up we still had laws against most pornography - do YOU believe that those laws were a violation of free speech?

You chose a very poor analogy.

Yes, we had laws against pornography. However, the law didn't punish people who advocated for the legalization of, or opposed the censorship of pornography. You have stated that you are actually for the punishment of people who are advocating against the law, not the speech at the center of the law itself.

[seer]

No, it is not. They are exercising their constitutional right to free speech at the request of their employees. And if you're too much of a coward to address the rest of my post and have to resort to Hypatia-esque quotemining, then it's clear you have no argument

And if the people of the state of Florida through their elected representatives want to remove Disney's special privileges that is their constitutional right...

[seer]

You chose a very poor analogy.

Yes, we had laws against pornography. However, the law didn't punish people who advocated for the legalization of, or opposed the censorship of pornography. You have stated that you are actually for the punishment of people who are advocating against the law, not the speech at the center of the law itself.

That is not what I asked - do YOU believe that those laws were a violation of free speech? And BTW people who produced porn were in fact punished...

[Gondwanaland]

And if the people of the state of Florida through their elected representatives want to remove Disney's special privileges that is their constitutional right...

Nope, a violation of someones free speech via government fascism is not a constitutional right. I take this post as your tacit admission that you are indeed too cowardly to respond to the rest of the post you quotemined from.

[seer]

Nope, a violation of someones free speech via government fascism is not a constitutional right. I take this post as your tacit admission that you are indeed too cowardly to respond to the rest of the post you quotemined from.

How does removing Disney's special privileges (which no one else has) stop Disney from doing or saying what they want - BE SPECIFIC...

[CivilDiscourse]

How does removing Disney's special privileges (which no one else has) stop Disney from doing or saying what they want - BE SPECIFIC...

The same way that fining someone for speech is a violation of the 1st amendment.

[CivilDiscourse]

That is not what I asked - do YOU believe that those laws were a violation of free speech? And BTW people who produced porn were in fact punished...

Again, your analogy is flawed. YOU are advocating that people who are speaking out against the law be punished, not the violators of the law itself.

[Gondwanaland]

How does removing Disney's special privileges (which no one else has) stop Disney from doing or saying what they want - BE SPECIFIC...

It's a direct, tangible punishment by a government in response to their exercise of free speech criticizing a law passed by said government.

thats a fundamental violation ofbfree speech. If you cant see that then you indeed do not care about the 1st Amendment.

[seer]

Again, your analogy is flawed. YOU are advocating that people who are speaking out against the law be punished, not the violators of the law itself.

You still have not answered - do YOU believe that those laws were a violation of free speech? Answer that and we can move on...