I'm fine with protecting speech. But removing the right for governments to mark adult content NSFW even after Congress passes that law? That's too far.
[deleted]
3 ups, 3y,
2 replies
Again, you’re making it specifically about NSFW. Your law means that the government has the power to censor whoever they like, and it’ll be perfectly legal.
We should leave the NSFW thing up to user discretion, imo
IG is right, this shouldn't be anarchy but it also shouldn't be censorship
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y
We need to strike a balance in that regard. sloth's proposal leans too far the other way.
[deleted]
1 up, 3y,
1 reply
I agree the government shouldn't be allowed to censor without reason, but they should also be allowed to enforce their own rules within reason.
[deleted]
2 ups, 3y,
1 reply
Yes. But we also should have rules in place to protect mod abuse. Do you want to have your mod revoked again, and not being able to legally fight back? I thought so
[deleted]
0 ups, 3y,
1 reply
I agree that we need to prevent mod abuse. But the government is elected to enforce their rules and they shouldn't have that right completely revoked, especially not if Congress backs them up.
[deleted]
1 up, 3y
Its not entirely revoked. No, its giving the people a way to fight back, so there are laws that protect them.
WAIT, SO WHAT IG IS BASICALLY SAYING IS…; GOVERNMENTS CAN CENSOR THEIR CITIZENS HOWEVER THEY SEE FIT, AND HE DOESN’T WANT TO PASS LAWS TO PROTECT THE FREE SPEECH OF THE PEOPLE; 🤔; IF YOU DON’T SEE AN ISSUE WITH THAT, AW SHEEZ. ALSO, IT’S A BIT MUCH FROM A LEADER THAT CLAIMS TO BE “PRO- FREE SPEECH”; BUT THEN AGAIN, WHY AM I SURPRISED
