Connect with us

Conservatism

States fighting back to stop social media censorship, protect citizens free speech

Published

on

Despite brief episodes of Congressional showmanship, federal lawmakers have taken no action to alleviate the growing onslaught of free speech censorship by social media giants that free Americans are experiencing with increasing frequency. This has left many Americans feeling powerless, angry, and ignored.

Finally, state lawmakers have begun to exercise their power over contract law jurisdiction to push back against the social media giants and ensure that the citizens in their states enjoy free speech.

Republicans in Florida and Rhode Island have introduced the Stop Social Media Censorship Act.

“They are trying to limit a person’s self-determination and what someone may want.”

Censorship, free speech, and self-determination:

The Meriam-Webster dictionary defines social media as, “forms of electronic communication (such as websites for social networking and microblogging) through which users create online communities to share information, ideas, personal messages, and other content (such as videos).”

Thus, social media companies are platforms for free speech.

Yet, social media companies’ suffocating knot of censorship continues to tighten, choking off the ability of free people to be heard; to help and reach out to others; to be innovative in thought, in process, and in expression; to share ideas and search for answers; to transcend geographic, social, and economic barriers in communicating and connecting with others.

“They are trying to limit a person’s self-determination and what someone may want, because they have a worldview that says, ‘We forbid this,’” Stephen Black told me.

Mr. Black is a pastor with First Stone Ministries, author of “Freedom Realized,” and a co-founder of the God’s Voice Conference, which was held February 22-23, 2019, at Fairview Baptist Church of Edmond, Oklahoma. The purpose of the God’s Voice Conference was to offer “a Biblical response to the queering of the church,” by radical LGBTQIA+ activist infiltration.

Conference videos were posted to Fairview Baptist’s Vimeo account for public viewing.

Vimeo, which has 80 million registered users, “is an add-free open video platform.” The website proclaims, “Vimeo is all about you and your videos,” and offers the public a tiered choice of user plans ranging in cost, from free to $75 per month.

Earlier this month, Vimeo informed Fairview Baptist that their account had been terminated. Reasons cited by Vimeo included, “an overall mean-spirited vibe,” and what the video platform loosely determined to be “Sexual Orientation Change Efforts.”

Vimeo later reinstated Fairview Baptist’s account after backlash, but still did not restore any of the videos from the God’s Voice Conference.

“It’s not like we asked Vimeo to create a product – to create a God’s Voice video – rather than just hosting speech. Vimeo wasn’t actually providing us a product: their service is to carry speech,” Black explained.

“This is the antithesis to be loving and tolerant.”

A small government solution that packs a BIG punch:

Representative Justin Price on Rhode Island and Florida Senator Joe Gruters have each introduced the Stop Social Media Censorship Act for consideration in their state assemblies. Lawmakers in other states are reportedly planning to the same.

The Stop Social Media Censorship Act utilizes the power that already lies in the hands of each state: jurisdiction over contract law matters.

(Herein this article is a copy of Florida’s version of the bill, which – according to lawyer Chris Severe and associate John Gunter, Jr. – is the most promising version and may be used as a template in other states.)

“[The] state has an interest in helping its citizens enjoy their free exercise of rights in… forums commonly used for religious and political speech.”

The bill, as explained in the above video, is separated into two parts.

  • Part one, “states that the state will treat social media websites that were not affiliated with a religious group or a political party from its inception, that has more than 75 million users, open to the public, as public utilities, or quasi state actors, or natural monopolies” or digital public squares. “This would have the effect of subjecting those specific websites with complying with the state and federal constitution.”
  • Part two, “creates a private right of action for users within the state who’ve been victimized by social media websites for having a different religious and political would view than the people who work for the social media website.

“These are contract law matters, and contract law is a state law issue.

“The act states that if there’s a social media website that is open to the public and was never affiliated with a religious or political organization from its inception, and if it has more than 75 million users and markets itself as being open to the public, that those websites can be sued by users who are censored for religious and political reasons, because that kind of censorship constitutes breach of contract, fraudulent inducement, unjust enrichment, and bad faith, and unfair dealing.

“Victims of the breach will be permitted to sue the social media websites in the court of competent jurisdiction, and seek $75,000 in statutory damages, attorney fees, and costs, [etc.] They can also seek actual damages and punitive damages.

“$75,000 is a magic number. It’s the jurisdictional minimum that will allow victims of social media censoring to have Article III standing to sue the social media websites in the United States’ federal district courts under diversity jurisdiction. Because most of the social media websites will be domiciled in a different state than the users, the victim of the beach can file a lawsuit in the district court in the state they live in, because that court would have personal jurisdiction over the social media website under the long-arm statue.”

Further, the Stop Social Media Censorship Act incentivizes “the local counsel to represent victims of that [contract] breach, because the prevailing party will be entitled to statutory damages, attorney fees, and because the victims are guaranteed to recover a minimum of $75,000.”

This is the small government, federalist, “lookin’ out for the regular folk” solution to our Goliath problem of social media censorship.

Florida Ssmca Sb1722 2019 by on Scribd

Which companies would be subject to state contract law jurisdiction?

Aside from Vimeo, Twitter and Facebook and YouTube would all be required to honor state contract law.

Facebook has 2.32 billion monthly active users. Facebook’s company mission is “to give people the power to build community and bring the world closer together. People use Facebook to stay connected with friends and family, to discover what’s going on in the world, and to share and express what matters to them”. Facebook describes itself as “a different kind of company that connects billions of people around the world, gives them ways to share what matters most to them, and helps bring people closer together… to empower power people around the world to build community and connect in meaningful ways.”

Twitter, which has 321 million monthly active users. The website claims it’s public users can “see every side of the story” and “spark a global conversation; both of which are difficult, if not impossible, to accomplish from behind an algorithmic wall designed to suppress the segment of the American population to which you belong.

YouTube, which has 1.9 billion monthly active users. YouTube’s mission “is to give everyone a voice and show them the world.” According to its website, YouTube supports freedom of expression, freedom of information, freedom of opportunity, and freedom to belong.

How fast can you say, “false advertising”?

Conclusion:

The Stop Social Media Censorship Act, pliable enough to fit the needs of the citizens of each state, appears to be the small government solution so desperately needed to ensure and to preserve to free voices of a free people. I encourage each reader to study the provided Florida bill and reach out to their state lawmakers.

Make your voice be heard!

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Advertisement
Click to comment

Conservatism

It’s been nearly two years since Capitol Hill told us they’d address the national debt in a year

Published

on

Its been nearly two years since Capitol Hill told us theyd address the national debt in a year

If there’s one thing that unites Democrats and Republicans in DC, it’s their unwillingness to tackle the national debt. During campaign season, both parties talk about it. They both point to the other’s policies and offer token solutions to address it, but these solutions never see the light of day. They always punt.

The GOP, when they had the House, Senate, and White House in their control, had decided to punt until next year. That was October, 2017. We’ve heard this line before. It’s always going to happen, just never in the current year. How many times will people allow them to say it without actually doing it?

We need to address the national debt immediately. That means dramatically cutting spending by eliminating programs, agencies, and even entire departments. By “eliminating,” that doesn’t mean make some cuts nor does it mean we move things around. To eliminate something means it needs to be abolished.

I’ll be called cold-hearted for suggesting such things. Is it hard to kill an agency that employs 50,000 people? Yes. Is it harsh to force those 50,000 Americans to seek other government jobs or hit the private sector? Yes. I wish it never came to this. I wish the expansion of Washington DC never happened in the first place, but it did and now it must be dealt with even if hundreds of thousands or even millions of Americans will be affected. That’s how precarious our situation is.

What about entitlements? Talking about cutting entitlements is the death knell for politicians. That’s why it never happens. They understand with 100% clarity that entitlements are unsustainable and grow harder to address with ever passing year, yet they punt. Why? Because they’re more concerned about retaining power than helping the nation.

What politicians only mention during campaign season is true year-round. The longer we wait to tackle the debt, the harder it’s going to be. Interest alone is killing us. We used to be able to say that if we don’t tackle it soon, future generations will be in deep trouble. Today, that phrase has been replaced:

If we don’t tackle the debt immediately, we’re dooming not just future generations but our own as well.

Every punt makes the problem harder to tackle. On top of real tax reform, we need to cut spending dramatically. It will hurt in the short term which is why every Congress is so afraid to do it. They know that spending cuts are unpopular come election time. Instead of perpetuating the unsustainable path we’re on, they need to take the bad news to the nation and educate the people on the imperative of tackling the debt immediately.

The problem isn’t really with the politicians, though. The bigger problem is with the voters. Most have no idea how bad the situation is. Trillions versus billions versus millions often doesn’t compute properly, and as long as the debt isn’t visible in their own lives, what difference does it really make? Others are aware of the problem but choose to ignore it because winning today is apparently more important that fixing such a huge problem and losing as a result.

We need a 30-year-plan for reducing the debt. Anyone who says it can’t take that long doesn’t realize it must take that long. The debt is too big to try to fit into a decade. Yet so few politicians talk about it.

This is just another reason we need the American Conservative Movement.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Conservatism

Dave Rubin on big tech: ‘They want to fear good people into not saying what they think’

Published

on

Dave Rubin on big tech They want to fear good people into not saying what they think

As our EIC said before, conservatives are being purged, silenced, and censored by big tech. It’s not even a conspiracy theory anymore. It’s easily demonstrable by the actions of progressive tech companies, which include all the big names, the leftist mainstream media, and their Democratic handlers. One doesn’t have to look too far to come to a clear conclusion that this is a coordinated attack against anything or anyone who supports conservatism, Christianity, and/or President Trump.

Dave Rubin discussed it with Liz Wheeler on her One America News show Tipping Point today. He made some important points about the motivations many “journalists”are invoking as they stop reporting the news and focus on being activists. Are we really to the point that media outlets no longer have an interest in any truth that doesn’t support their agenda?

Apparently so.

As Rubin points out, they take their perspectives and write articles that reinforce their preformed conclusions. That’s not journalism. Moreover, their suppressing conversation. This is unacceptable.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Conservatism

Christian baker Jack Phillips sued for discrimination for a third time

Published

on

Christian baker sued for discrimination for a third time

If at first you don’t succeed, keep harassing until the Christian pays for his religion. That seems to be the mantra in Colorado as baker Jack Phillips and his attorney, Jeremy Tedesco, are being dragged back into court for a third time to defend Phillips’ right to not betray his religious beliefs in order to bake someone’s symbolic cake.

Phillips joined Fox News host Laura Ingraham to give details about his latest legal woes. This time, it’s a civil suit over his unwillingness to help celebrate gender reassignment with a cake that is blue on the outside, pink on the inside.

In our post-truth society, it’s understandable that so many progressives are trying to impose their morality by forcing Christians and conservatives to abandon our values in favor of their “freedoms.” But it really has nothing to do with freedom. This is about autonomy. It goes beyond a post-modern society that does not believe in absolute truth to a post-truth society that believes the only that matters is feelings. Truth is relative to the individual, and if the path to true freedom is the truth, then where is the falseness of autonomy leading our society?

But I digress.

In America, our rights to practice our religion as we see fit as long as doing so does not break the law are built into the foundation of all our freedoms, the Bill of Rights. Attacks on it are attacks on the nation.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending