Free speech in USA is a joke, it's both poorly protected and poorly regulated at the same time. Worst of both worlds!
this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2024
461 points (99.1% liked)
politics
19241 readers
2391 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
So. I have this... Stance. Humanity has at no point evolved past tribalism. We all live in tribes. The tribe with the most power waxes poetic about the importance of free speech, but the truth is, they only allow as much free speech as allows their tribe to maintain their position. All the rest of our tribes can squabble over whatever remaining scraps of power are left after the controlling tribe is full up.
That's certainly true for some people.
But I don't see the Democrats out there banning books.
Speak for yourself. I'm all for banning ghostwritten books by conservative talking heads so they can launder money and game bestseller lists.
Going after them for fraud would work.
I mean honestly that's how it should work. If they're writing and publishing disinformation that's not in the "fiction" section then there should be some kind of regulatory backlash (same with news/entertainment etc). It's like letting someone re-write history textbooks... but I suppose that's been going on for a long time already.
Implementation guidelines say that banned materials must be “legally disposed of” and “may not be sold or distributed”.
So, a book burning. Got it.
What about abandoning them in a heavy traffic area?
The book burners?
load more comments
(1 replies)
WHAT.THE.FUCK.
Motherfuckin' can't read 'Superfudge' in Utah anymore? This is truly the darkest timeline.
Really? I assumed it would be Are You There God it's Me Margaret. What could they possibly find offensive about Superfudge?
What could they be against a book that mentions God in the title?
It's about a girl and her friends discussing menstruation, and wishing they could menstruate, and being jealous of other girls who already menstruate, and praying to God that they menstruate soon. I can see where that would frighten pearl clutchers.
Rhetorical! Thanks for the answer reminding us how against women these fuckers are though!
load more comments
(2 replies)
"An entire book about a girl asking if God is there!? What a waste of time! The answer is 'Yes, God is there.'. We just saved you like 10 hours! (Though sometimes he may let you suffer or die without ever showing himself. But he's a silly ole God, and it was probably for your own good anyways.)"
“I’m gonna need you to step back about 20 paces there… You’re talkin’ about a woman, reading?”
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
It's listed in the article. It's "Forever" by Judy Blume. Not sure that I'm familiar with it.
"so, any progress on the school shooting problem?"
"nah, we needed to fix the superfudge problem. now we're going to work on the pokemon problem. it doesn't glorify god!"
Pokemon don't evolve! They become more intelligently designed!
Why can't we ever get rid of fascists? Every generation they try the same crap and get away with it.
Because the same people taking away the rights are the ones saying that we can't retaliate for taking away our rights.
I suspect it’s just a personality type. Maybe we could use eugenics to get rid of this undesirable trait. Oh wait. Dammit
Why can't we ever get rid of fascists?
I believe this is where the second amendment comes in.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Fake news!
You’re allowed to read them, it just has to be inside a dark bag with only magical stones for illumination.
load more comments
(5 replies)
My Catholic junior high school library is where I discovered Judy Blume. I probably read every single book of hers that they had, and there were a lot!
So…calm down, Utah. It’s okay.
Shithole 3rd world country
It'd be funny if people who owned properties beside the schools just set up one of those take one leave one community street libraries filled with all the banned boom
load more comments
(3 replies)
First they came for the books, and I did not speak out, because I am an illiterate Republican.
Wow, as a "privileged white cis man", I loved JB's books. Fuck any dumbasses against JB.
load more comments
(1 replies)
FFS Utah, your lucky you have pretty rocks, but you got to knock this shit off.
Can we nuke the Moron theocracy yet or is that ffowned apon?
In a few years, all the toxic chemicals at the bottom of the great salt lake will take care of that after it dries up.
I'm pretty sure these weirdo losers have already succumbed to the toxic chemicals.
Yeah but then theyll roll back the Arizona and destroy any potential Idaho has, I want shadows not refugees.
load more comments
(1 replies)
That list is 13 books by 7 authors.
Not good, but the summary is wrong.
Edit: the article needs some proof reading
Yeah. An editor checking the headline would help.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Fucking imbeciles.
While I hate this, I'm left wondering why we even mention the authors gender.
Is it to indicate that lawmakers go against women's freedoms?
Yes. A lot of book bans have been focused on books written by women and minorities.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Outlaw Utah. Call it a day.
Progressive districts need to get the bible and book of mormon banned
Sigh. Way to guarantee all the young adults are going to read the Twilight of shitty vanilla fairy melodramas.
Reading is something for everyone and anyone to enjoy. while a piece of art could have technical flaws and shortcomings, if someone enjoys it GREAT. We all like liking things. Don't shame them for liking something just because it makes you feel more well read.
Its also OK to point out when a piece of literature is badly written and, subjectively, not very good. The person you responded to was shitting on the work, you inferred the shame on the reader. One should not feel that a criticism of a work (however well founded the criticism is) is an attack or attempt to shame someone just because they happen to like it.
There are plenty of works that are popular but written like shit. Its fine to like them, and its fine to point out how the writing style is bad. As another example, Ready player one is somehow a popular story even though the writing is terrible. I would never shame someone for reading it, but I'm also not going to pretend like its a good book or not full of lazy references to popular media properties.
load more comments
(7 replies)
view more: next ›