Maybe i am a bit infuriated of the salami tactics, making privacy transgressions more and more frequent. Taking pictures after asking for permission is one thing, documenting an operation where only the operation area is in view might also be necessary.

Infringing on patients privacy should be necessity-based, not by default. And the collected data should be protected as good as possible, not using some big data megacorps (that make their money off advertising or influencing people).

thanks @MBech@feddit.dk and @echodot@feddit.uk, I was about reply these two points and then saw your replies.

Depends on the debate. The government can't stop them from debating. If you host a debate though, without any government affiliation, you're not forced to let them attend. In the same way, if you own a forum on the internet, you can silence anyone you want to. The literal ONLY thing the first amendment protects against, is government persecution for speech. It has nothing whatsoever to do with how people react to said speech. Just because someone cries "Muh first amendment!" doesn't mean you actually have to respect them. You can shame them, silence them, ostracise them. Put up billboards telling people how fucking insane they are. Take out an ad in the local newspaper to display their bullshit in an attempt to shame them into submission, tell them to go fuck themselves. If they're in your house, you can toss them out. YOU can do whatever you want. YOU can't breach the first amendment, only the government can.

You don’t have a first amendment right to debate stuff here.