120
Kimmel's ABC show won't air interview with Democrat because of Trump FCC threats (arstechnica.com)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/DeclineIntoCensorship@lemmy.dbzer0.com
33 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 1 month ago (25 children)

Your solution to the federal government infringing on first amendment rights is for the federal government to continue infringing on first amendment rights?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    I hear you but when one side refuses to follow established law and suffers no consequences, it's playing a loser's game It will be fucking ugly but we probably have to finish the civil war since it was allowed to fester and grow and here we are in 2026 with a mockery of a government system.

    Continuing on and expecting something to change in a completely rigged game is insane .

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    not the OP but i don't agree with your premise.

    Fox has broken the social contract and as Popper pointed out, if you allow. intolerance to prosper, you get... an intolerant society.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (20 children)

    You're claiming that large corporations should have first amendment rights?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (19 children)

    I'm claiming people should have first amendment rights. Corporations are a collection of people.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (18 children)

    And we circle back to exactly the sort of dipshit rationale that has fucked the us over for so long.

    Corporations are not individuals. They do not get the rights that humans do. The end.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (17 children)

    I just double checked the first amendment and try as I might I couldn't find the word "individuals" anywhere. I did see "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press" though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (16 children)

    Probably because they thought nobody would be stupid enough to expect that it applied to organizations.

    You're just essentially arguing that citizens united was a good thing. Which is reprehensively stupid.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (15 children)

    If you want to control speech you're no better than maga. I dont care what kind of excuses or justifications you come up with. You and all the other authoritarians can fuck off.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (14 children)

    Lol. Fuck no. I'm an authoritarian for disagreeing with the logic that brought us citizens fucking United?

    Man, Lemmy is remarkable today.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (13 children)

    You're an authoritarian for advocating congressional infringement of speech. The only difference between you and MAGA is the justifications you come up with.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (12 children)

    I can do much worse. I also don't believe that the building a business is housed in does not deserve free speech.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (11 children)

    Don't you have some books to burn adolf?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (10 children)

    I also don't think birds should have free speech. Fuck those guys.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (9 children)

    You're entitled to your opinion. But here in reality, the first amendment doesn't apply to birds. It doesn't apply to corporations. It doesn't apply to people. It applies to Congress, and describes things that they are not allowed to abridge. If you hate the first amendment so much, petition to change it. Nobody can legally stop you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (8 children)

    It doesn't apply to corporations.

    This has been the perfect Lemmy conversation because you finally circled back around to negating the point that you originally made and have been defending so vehemently.

    Nice work.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    Bullshit, I've been consistent. The amendment applies to Congress. It prohibits the government from restricting speech. It doesn't specify whose speech. They're not allowed to restrict anyone's. If you ever bothered to read it, the wording makes that pretty clear. All 10 amendments in the bill of rights are structured that way.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (6 children)

    Corporate speech doesn't apply and is restricted all of the time

    Why? Because our rights protect people. Corporations should be classified differently.

    Btw, I'm now ordering the restriction of free speech for autobots. And you cant stop me. Lol.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

    If you want the government to act without limits entirely based on vibes you must love the current administration.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    You may be right. Corporations may actually constitute individual people, given your willingness to suck their dicks.

    Corporate entities are not individuals and have different rights and responsibilities.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (3 children)

    I checked the first amendment again and nope, still doesn't say anything about individuals. Still says "Congress shall make no law".

    Your pal trump, who is currently abridging the ABC corporation's right to free speech using essentially the same rationale as you, is going to lose his lawsuit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    You do realize that you're vouching for Trump right now. Corporations are the people period. The moment we start elevating corporations to having lights, we're going to immediately diminish ours.

    You act like you're fighting for the people's rights, but you're doing the contrary. Right now you're just sucking corporate dick.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •