Tom Says

What does anyone think about viewpoint discrimination, for instance, or the tones of a post, or something viewed as disagreeable or harsh? An example might be a religious (churchy) site where one essentially can’t even speak normally, as everything is expected to be couched in church-speak, or they’re perhaps offended. Anything succintly but emphatically expressed, oftentimes whether in agreement or not, is shut down. This is fakery and in many cases people like it because it gives them a club to belong to. There’s also another perhaps more prevalent territory of speech, of content providers, universities, workplaces, and restaurants, for example, who don’t want to hear dissenting or disagreeing or any adamant posts or conversations or talk, claiming it’s their business, or some such, and subsequently their right. This is getting discombobulating. “Free speech” shouldn’t cause this much confusion. Many content providers such as on YouTube and other platforms consent regularly, if not daily, to limits on their freedom of speech, and many of these persons claim to be pro-freedom of speech, including self-professed patriots, preppers (they may say that they’d rather be able to talk to people and get some information conveyed to people and that’s why they stay on a said platfom), religious persons, professionals, and people across the spectrum.