Reply to thread

Message

The Murthy vs Missouri goes to show how far this has progressed. When we have members of SCOTUS voicing concerns with the interpretation of the First Amendment because it's "hamstringing the government in significant ways?" Members of SCOTUS.

In itself I'm not "riled" up about the questions: they were what I'd call tame given the context.

It does get to the core here. The government doesn't have the right to punish people for speech (though we are seeing that happen.) Does it have the right to persuade platforms to remove content?

IN a controlled context, I'd say yes. Free market. However ...control, and the action of government officials ... yeah, oxymoron.

<blockquote data-quote="TerryP" data-source="post: 1533449" data-attributes="member: 12209"><img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🎯" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f3af.png" title="Direct hit&nbsp; &nbsp; :dart:" data-shortname=":dart:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /> The Murthy vs Missouri goes to show how far this has progressed.&nbsp; When we have members of SCOTUS voicing concerns with the interpretation of the First Amendment because it&#039;s &quot;hamstringing the government in significant ways?&quot; Members of SCOTUS.In itself I&#039;m not &quot;riled&quot; up about the questions: they were what I&#039;d call tame given the context.&nbsp; It does get to the core here.&nbsp; The government doesn&#039;t have the right to punish people for speech (though we are seeing that happen.)&nbsp; Does it have the right to persuade platforms to remove content?&nbsp; IN a controlled context, I&#039;d say yes.&nbsp; Free market.&nbsp; However ...control, and the action of government officials ... yeah, oxymoron.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TerryP, post: 1533449, member: 12209"] 🎯 The [I]Murthy vs Missouri [/I]goes to show how far this has progressed. When we have members of SCOTUS voicing concerns with the interpretation of the First Amendment because it's "hamstringing the government in significant ways?" [B] Members[/B] of SCOTUS. In itself I'm not "riled" up about the questions: they were what I'd call tame given the context. It does get to the core here. The government doesn't have the right to punish people for speech (though we are seeing that happen.) Does it have the right to persuade platforms to remove content? IN a controlled context, I'd say yes. Free market. However ...control, and the action of government officials ... yeah, oxymoron. [/QUOTE]