As I have mentioned in the last few webcasts, as choices are made, options shrink. And so does the time to make them.
The last cast, we were in the eye of the storm, with all direction leading to the tumult. With the failure to even question the certifications for constitutionality or fraud, we move the winds from the Tyrannical option at full speed ahead.
Spreaker Podcast Version
Here is my Facebook Post I referred to in the webcast:
The “illegality” is not in the 1st Am, but in the Amazon Server’s “Terms of Service” agreement with Parler, which, I understand, a court will decide.
As far as a Social Media site, with the SCOTUS ruling that a bakery need not give service to an ideal or code of ethics that infringes on their own, they can make Terms of Service that lay out the dos and do not’s to limit your 1st Are freedoms legally.
The real issue is the shifting and unequal applications of the Terms of Service.
If you built a business or some other income-producing endeavor on their service, then they change the terms drastically curtailing your continued success, or they equally apply those terms, that is actionable. As I see it, this is the beef with Social Media. Not the 1at Amendment, which has never covered private enterprise. BUT it DOES cover the Public arena; Public Parks, Pubic Schools, etc.
To make things that ideologically clash with the non-business based agendas of these services, that have been redefining terms (like hate speech) and mischaracterizing actions by these they wish to remove, violations of those terms allowing them to de-platform them.
The courts need to rule that “equal protection” applies to the “Terms of Service,” and those terms are clearly and firmly defined.
If there is only one service provider (or a group of like-minded) that excludes service based on ideological reasons and NOT ALLEGED ILLEGAL practices, they need to be declared a monopoly or acting in consort (anti-trust or RICO).
There was another bakery the gay couple could have received services. And they did not let them plan the wedding, and when the cake was to be delivered, they refused to do it.
We could learn from the 60s. It was ruled ideologically to make Blacks sit in the back of the bus, which violated the Equal Protection for humans.
Social Media companies will NOT be honest and say they are excluding Conservative or some Christian ideals. It would mar their professed ideological high ground and recruitment and propaganda efforts. So they use their united force to mischaracterize, redefine and out-right lie to justify their action.
You can always have access to everything Feet to the Fire Radio Audio & Video plus Articles and Archives at:
Twitter: JAJancik GAB: @F2F
https://www.facebook.com/james.a.jancik (Personal Timeline)
eMail: feettothefireradio AT protonmail DOT com
Free Access to Legacy Archives 2003-present: