monkeydelarge: <snip>
It's kind of strange that someone who values freedom so much is pro censorship and against the freedom of speech... Maybe because all your thoughts come from your ego and emotions? OR maybe you think anything less 100% freedom for everyone is wrong?
But you are forgetting that freedom can be used to take away freedom. HereForTheBeer: Which is exactly the point. You are advocating taking away my freedom to express an opinion through my private business, that being "I take this position on issue XYZ and refuse to support the opposing opinion." In the hypothetical case, some customers come to my store in part because of the products I sell. It is perfectly logical that they might also NOT come to my store because of the products I sell. For instance, I have a kid's book store and someone writes a book on the joys of man-boy love. The author / publisher drops off 50 copies and I should be required to sell that? "Well sure - it's a book about kids, and not spreading that message means you're evil and immoral and against freedom."
Uuuhhh...
Yes, the private property example applies. Because it's about private property and Free Speech, not about products. A store is private property.
Anyway...
Pick any topic. Suppose you and I have opinions on that topic that are polar opposites. Neither opinion is better or worse than the other. You have a store in which you express that opinion. I have a product in which I express the opposite. You propose that I should be able to force you to express my opinion in your store. In the process, gov't has allowed me to A) violate your free speech rights of freedom from my opinion, and B) violate your private property rights. Forced application of my single right has violated two of yours.
Who, in their right mind, would then choose to open a business if any schmuck can come in off the street, place their product on my shelf, and - with the backing of law - force me to sell a product that I do not want to sell? (That leaves out the bit about forcing me to buy the product in the first place - the wholesale purchase - which is whole other matter that makes the position even more unsupportable).
No, I am not pro-censorship. The problem is that you keep saying that this is censorship. It's not. It's my Free Speech right to decide what message is propagated via my private property / enterprise. I in no way say that my opinion needs to apply to every other store. For all I care, the neighboring stores can sell the product. For all I care, I might be the only one NOT selling it. But it's my choice, for my property, and my choice doesn't extend to others' private property. Censorship would be me saying you can't sell it in my store, and also you can't sell it in my neighbor's store. But I can't censor because it's his store, not mine, and I have no say in what shows up on his shelf.
No, I am not against Freedom of Speech. Read again and you'll see the opposite:
"It's your Free Speech right to not participate in the propagation of my message. It's my right to attempt to spread my message from my own property, so long as it's not intruding upon the rights of others. And it's other folks' right to ignore me and also ignore whatever message I'm attempting to spread."
What I am against is the arbitrary decision to force one person's Free Speech upon another person,
at which point it is no longer Free Speech. That point is key to the whole thing. Free Speech guarantees neither your choice of soapbox nor an audience. It only guarantees that you can express your message.
Don't forget the maxim, "Your right to swing your fists ends at my nose." My store is my nose.
You can express an opinion without taking part in censorship. A store could be your private property but so what. Just because your store is your private property, doesn't mean it's acceptable to do whatever you want on your private property. One could still do something unethical on their private property or do something illegal. And I don't know why you are bringing up your rights again. Rights don't mean shit in a discussion about what is right and what is wrong. We aren't talking about rights here. Save that energy for a discussion about rights, please. And you also know that before the 1800s, men had the right to beat their wives. And around that time, people had the right to duel each other to the death. So rights don't meant shit. Did you forget that we are talking about what is right and what is wrong and not rights? But I'm going to end this debate or whatever this is. It's obvious at this point that your mind is incapable of seeing the importance of free flowing information and speech from every store that sells information and speech in this world. Your mind is incapable of seeing the evil of censorship. In your mind, the right to take part in censorship, the right to do whatever you want on your private property is more important than the free flow of information and speech. I don't why exactly. Maybe you aren't an immoral person but there is something wrong with you, definitely. I have nothing more to say to you.
