>> Get that through your head. They owe you nothing.
>If you want to be abrasive on tangents, you can definitely be that guy, but that was not the subject, rather the nature of censorship. You completely disregard my example of iligitemate private censorship by the banks, intended to point out the problem, only to forcefully restate a extremist ideological position that doesn't really function in any true society. Ok...
Abrasive or not, it's not a tangent. It's the central point.
I didn't disregard anything -- rather, I didn't address the tangent you were off on.
Yes, censorship is bad. There. I addressed your tangent.
However, mine is not an extremist position at all. Freedom of expression and property rights are core elements of Western civilization.
Clearly, we're talking past each other. Which is too bad.
But I'll restate my main thesis once more: You can say whatever you want. But you are not entitled to an audience. And here's the proof.
>If you want to be abrasive on tangents, you can definitely be that guy, but that was not the subject, rather the nature of censorship. You completely disregard my example of iligitemate private censorship by the banks, intended to point out the problem, only to forcefully restate a extremist ideological position that doesn't really function in any true society. Ok...
Abrasive or not, it's not a tangent. It's the central point.
I didn't disregard anything -- rather, I didn't address the tangent you were off on.
Yes, censorship is bad. There. I addressed your tangent.
However, mine is not an extremist position at all. Freedom of expression and property rights are core elements of Western civilization.
Clearly, we're talking past each other. Which is too bad.
But I'll restate my main thesis once more: You can say whatever you want. But you are not entitled to an audience. And here's the proof.