Posts by MeanMrMustard

i find this alarming because jones was very outspoken and had great guests on discussing topics most other media outlets wouldn't go near.. the fact that many have restricted him access to their medium what does this say on our freedoms of speech?.

MeanMrMustard

Aannnnd it’s getting worse.

Robert Spencer (not to be confused with the leftist racist Richard Spencer) had his patreon account closed because of demands from MasterCard!

https://youtu.be/14dOSQSWlxY

A false flag attempt on Molyneux’s channel today. The strikes came from videos that you wouldn’t even suspect are an issue. Incredible. Take down didn’t work as fans started messaging YouTube group on Twitter.

https://youtu.be/3CKniE7PGuw

286

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Baker Who Refused to Bake Cake for Gay Couple

by Simon in

seems like such an obviously correct decision to overturn the previous overreach - it should never have been necessary to go to the supreme court but happened because the rights of the religious were being ignored.. as the fundamental level, no one should be able to compel you to work for them or to provide services that go against your beliefs, and certainly not have the government be able to force you to comply.. if this was allowed there would be so many unreconcilable situations that would clog up courts over nonsense.. i also have little patience for these activists that intentionally look to be offended.

it really doesn't do their cause any good to go round looking to make trouble for people.

it's also misguided because it ends up strengthening religious rights over effectively stupid issues.. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html.

MeanMrMustard

https://youtu.be/14dOSQSWlxY

286

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Baker Who Refused to Bake Cake for Gay Couple

by Simon in

seems like such an obviously correct decision to overturn the previous overreach - it should never have been necessary to go to the supreme court but happened because the rights of the religious were being ignored.. as the fundamental level, no one should be able to compel you to work for them or to provide services that go against your beliefs, and certainly not have the government be able to force you to comply.. if this was allowed there would be so many unreconcilable situations that would clog up courts over nonsense.. i also have little patience for these activists that intentionally look to be offended.

it really doesn't do their cause any good to go round looking to make trouble for people.

it's also misguided because it ends up strengthening religious rights over effectively stupid issues.. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html.

MeanMrMustard

When you provide a service or product to the general public you loose some of your individual liberty right?

No. Please tell me why his property is no longer his property just because he owns a business.

This is the problem we run into with protected classes of people. What happens when one protected class clash with another? That’s a clear indication the entire idea should be thrown away. Why can’t we just have freedom of association? He doesn’t want to make the cake. Whatever the reason is irrelevant ... just go somewhere else.

97

Alex Jones, Infowars Ban on Youtube, FB and other platforms

by pleaseresearch in

what are you thoughts on this?.

i find this alarming because jones was very outspoken and had great guests on discussing topics most other media outlets wouldn't go near.. the fact that many have restricted him access to their medium what does this say on our freedoms of speech?.

MeanMrMustard

Interesting perspective: Tom Woods and Michael Malice. I see this happening with bitchute.com now.

https://youtu.be/LDg4VwGFYyI

Another interesting video (only 9 min) from YouTuber Law:

https://youtu.be/UKgrIRq7HEA

It seems like as long as section 230 of Communication and Decency Act is Law, it will near impossible to fight back legally. But this might be OK - see first vid.

97

Alex Jones, Infowars Ban on Youtube, FB and other platforms

by pleaseresearch in

what are you thoughts on this?.

i find this alarming because jones was very outspoken and had great guests on discussing topics most other media outlets wouldn't go near.. the fact that many have restricted him access to their medium what does this say on our freedoms of speech?.

MeanMrMustard

@Wasanelder: Is that Pelosi? It looks like Pelosi...

286

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Baker Who Refused to Bake Cake for Gay Couple

by Simon in

seems like such an obviously correct decision to overturn the previous overreach - it should never have been necessary to go to the supreme court but happened because the rights of the religious were being ignored.. as the fundamental level, no one should be able to compel you to work for them or to provide services that go against your beliefs, and certainly not have the government be able to force you to comply.. if this was allowed there would be so many unreconcilable situations that would clog up courts over nonsense.. i also have little patience for these activists that intentionally look to be offended.

it really doesn't do their cause any good to go round looking to make trouble for people.

it's also misguided because it ends up strengthening religious rights over effectively stupid issues.. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html.

MeanMrMustard

Good Lord, these people are pure scoundrels.

97

Alex Jones, Infowars Ban on Youtube, FB and other platforms

by pleaseresearch in

what are you thoughts on this?.

i find this alarming because jones was very outspoken and had great guests on discussing topics most other media outlets wouldn't go near.. the fact that many have restricted him access to their medium what does this say on our freedoms of speech?.

MeanMrMustard

@atomant: Actually... yes. That seems accurate.

97

Alex Jones, Infowars Ban on Youtube, FB and other platforms

by pleaseresearch in

what are you thoughts on this?.

i find this alarming because jones was very outspoken and had great guests on discussing topics most other media outlets wouldn't go near.. the fact that many have restricted him access to their medium what does this say on our freedoms of speech?.

MeanMrMustard

Wikipedia describes her as “alt-right”. How much you want to bet if I look into it, she’s not really alt-right and stands for classic liberal values?

Edit: ohhh that’s where I know that name. She was the girl who crashed the Julius Caesar play... the one where Caesar is dressed like Trump. She objected to a mock Trump assassination fantasy ... yeah, that will get you the alt-right label.

Meanwhile, Richard Spencer is up and running..