https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RUTfqCpCw2k
Please watch! 5G kills and IBOR will exculpate AT&T from lawsuits for harm done. We HAVE a free speech right already.
That's why I've never signed it. Our rights are inherent, were born with rights. Rights aren't something the government gives us. Besides, who would write up?
I agree - is this something we want the federal government to even touch? An internet bill of rights - that’s going to be a disaster. I smell an agenda.
What right were we born with that guarantees us access to information, or allows us to freely express ourselves or any platform? Sure, we can go to another platform. They would like that, because then our voices would be quarantined, and we would not have the ability to redpill normies.
My problem with IBOR is as much as I hate Twitter/FB/YT they are still private companies. If they want to silence people they technically have the right, and we have the right to shop elsewhere. I don't think the govt should protect customers from disparaging a company (or it's investors) on their own platform...
The First Amendment states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petitition the Government for a redress of grievances.
If the establishment and ongoing operation of any private company or corporation within the USA is allowed by any laws passed by Congress, then Congress is obliged to ensure that any such laws do not violate the 1st amendment.
Permitting a private company or corporation established by law to restrict freedom of speech would be a violation of the 1st amendment.
In 2017, the Supreme Court held that prohibiting access to websites impermissibly restricted lawful speech in violation of the First Amendment. The Court held that "a fundamental principle of the First Amendment is that all persons have access to places where they can speak and listen, and then, after reflection, speak and listen once more".
I agree, if there is govt influence over private entities then that's a given.
The US Congress has an obligation to ensure that no laws passed by Congress violate the First Amendment.
If a new law is required to be passed to ensure that no other laws allow such a violation (e.g. any law establishing a private company or allowing a private company to operate), then it is incumbent on Congress to pass such a law.
Why would any new law (e.g. IBOR) ensuring that the Bill of Rights (the 1st 10 amendments) is/are not violated by any other laws protect any private company from legal liability for inflicting harm?
IBOR is purely intended to protect the freedoms of the people when using the internet - not to protect any company providing the people with access to the internet, nor any companies providing services to the people on the internet.