YouTube bans Hate

[Sergeant Gleed]

It's a Constitutional issue, and we should err on the side of the Constitution. Yes?

Yes.

The Constitution bans censorship.

The Constitution also requires equal protection under the law.

Google routinely manipulates it's data to present politically favored potions up front, a clear violation of federal election laws.

[Sergeant Gleed]

The only reason I can think of regulating a monopoly is it harms people because it monopolizes a good or service. But people have many choices for publishing and viewing videos and those who do agree to the company's rules, just like you agree to forum rules when joining.

Go ahead.

Pretend Fakebook and Twitter and YouTube are effective monopolies.

[MisterVeritis]

It's way past time for Google, Fakebook, Twitter and YouTube to be regulated by the FCC under the same standards and legal liabilities the radio, TV and telephone companies have enjoyed, especially the part where client information cannot be sold to third parties.

Absolutely not.

[MisterVeritis]

Yes.

The Constitution bans censorship.

The Constitution also requires equal protection under the law.

Google routinely manipulates it's data to present politically favored potions up front, a clear violation of federal election laws.

Find mt link to the Constitution. Read it.

[Sergeant Gleed]

The Constitution protects the rights of the people against government interference.

"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, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

This is a private matter. The government is not interfering, nor should it.

Wrong.

Try to learn what a coercive monopoly is.

[Sergeant Gleed]

Find mt link to the Constitution. Read it.

You think I need to look up the first Amendment?

When monopolies become harmful, as these are, then either congress or lynch mobs need to act.

I see you have no problem with people being denied their property, via arbitrary and biased fiat, in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

[MisterVeritis]

You think I need to look up the first Amendment?

When monopolies become harmful, as these are, then either congress or lynch mobs need to act.

I see you have no problem with people being denied their property, via arbitrary and biased fiat, in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

You clearly have failed to understand the Constitution.

You have potential. Do try to live up to it.

[Chris]

Wrong.

Try to learn what a coercive monopoly is.

Try to name one.