Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

The Evangelists of Tolerance Have a Zero-Tolerance Policy

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Joe Cooper

unread,
Aug 9, 2017, 11:32:50 AM8/9/17
to
Why is it that the self-proclaimed evangelists of tolerance always seem
to have a zero-tolerance policy? Tech giants that run the world’s largest
platforms of public discourse—Google, Facebook and Twitter—are the least
likely to allow the diversity of opinion. They regularly ban content with
which they disagree, promote mainstream media’s #fakenews while promising
to eliminate fake news, present false hierarchy of trending hashtags,
prevent access to websites (sometimes millions of them), and daily
silence those who don’t espouse a liberal worldview. And it’s not just
overly-aggressive or error-prone algorithms that are to blame. Humans
create those algorithms. And scores of human “content reviewers” manually
remove truth, literally impacting public opinion and even elections.

This should alarm any free society.

These platforms are largely the disseminators of today’s news and
information, but an Orwellian sponsored form rigidly controlled by those
who value (selective) Freedom from Offense more than Freedom.

Google warns about its users engaging in “hate speech” but doesn’t define
what “hate” is. “Keep in mind that not everything that’s mean or
insulting is hate speech,” is the closest they get to identifying it. But
they warn users: “Don’t Cross the Line.” It’s hard to avoid crossing a
line when there is no discernible line. Google-owned YouTube repeatedly
shreds the First Amendment by valuing, first, their penchant to censor
content that proves liberalism wrong.

James Damore, a Google employee, described himself as a “classical
liberal” and penned an incredibly thoughtful memo on diversity at Google.
But the Deities of Diversity quickly descended from their thrones and
demanded complete allegiance to their doctrine of intolerance. He was
immediately fired for offering a diverse opinion. I wonder if you can
Google the enormity of the irony. Damore predicted the outcome in his 10-
page critique: “…but when it comes to diversity and inclusion, Google’s
left bias has created a politically correct monoculture that maintains
its hold by shaming dissenters into silence.” Shame on you, James Damore;
you told the truth.

These organizations claim to be private companies; therefore, they don’t
have to abide by the First Amendment. Yet these are the same leftist
corporations demanding that every American business/business owner be
bound by corporate America’s deeply flawed interpretation of the
Constitution—namely the 14th Amendment’s “equality under the law”
component. So, bakers, photographers, florists and other artists must
submit to the (non-existent) Constitutional “right to be served”, no
matter what, but an employee who dissents gets served a termination
notice? These are the same billion-dollar bullies demanding other
Americans leave their personal beliefs at the door of their business and
accept everyone’s opinions and behaviors. But they never do.

Dear Social Media Titans: duplicity is not diversity. You want to dictate
public potty policies, for instance, while ignoring your own cesspools of
decaying workplace freedom. The hypocrisy reeks.

Don’t get me wrong. Words are revolutionary. They have the power to,
literally, bring down or build up kingdoms. The book of James tells us
the tongue has the power to speak Life or Death. As a Christian, I want
to speak words that illuminate Truth, no matter the hostility of an
increasingly secular culture that rejects it. We should all be mindful of
our expressions, but no one should have the power to control or punish
which words we use. Who wants to be told what they have to believe or
what they have to say? Our First Amendment right of free speech isn’t a
suggestion; it’s our foundation. I loathe the KKK and the utter stupidity
of racism, but I believe even cowards in sheets and dunce caps should be
able to spew their ignorant rhetoric—as long as it isn’t encouraging
physical violence.

Twitter defines “hateful content” this way: “Hate speech or advocacy
against a protected group or an individual or organization.” This
includes race, ethnicity, national origin, “sexual orientation”, “gender
identity”, religious affiliation, age, disability and so forth. Yet,
Twitter actively shadow bans or revokes accounts regularly with which
they ideologically disagree. And I’m not talking about terrorist accounts
that encourage and glorify barbarity against another human being. Those
vile cauldrons of actual hate should be shut down.

“Advocacy against” means any opinion that is contrary to their own and
doesn’t affirm their propaganda-du-jour. Live Action’s prolife Twitter
ads violate their “policies”. Ray Comfort’s “Audacity” trailer, which
compassionately presents a Biblical perspective on homosexuality, was
yanked by YouTube in July 2015. (The whole movie is now available to view
on YouTube.) I suspect my own organization’s (The Radiance Foundation’s)
Twitter account, @LifeHasPurpose, is shadow banned, for being pro-life,
pro-science, pro-factivism, and anti-liberalism. We’ve never posted a
hateful tweet, but “hate” is in the clouded eye of the social media
platform. A multi-million-dollar American business, able to exist because
of the First Amendment, continually shows disdain for the freedom that
birthed it.

The National Abortion Federation considers peaceful pro-life rhetoric and
actions to be “hate speech.” Mainstream LGBTQXYZ activist groups have
succeeded in New York City and in DC to cast “wrong” pronouns as finable
hate speech. The radical leftist Southern Poverty Law Center, which
suffers a poverty of morality, wields the label “hate” like a weapon
against its political opponents.

This is not some brave-new world; we’ve seen this many times in
humankind’s cyclical past. This is not inclusivity. The exclusion of
differences of opinion in the public sphere is dangerous. It’s both
thought-control and thoughtless, ignoring the historical ramifications of
restricting speech. Zero tolerance is zero freedom.

Sorry Conservatives. Sorry (Biblically-adherent) Christians. Sorry
dissenters of ever-oxymoronic political correctness. Get to the back of
the free speech bus. I see where this is all going, and it’s a route that
America cannot afford to take.

Source: http://bit.ly/2ftUBTs

--
"The Marxists, communists and fascists of the Democrat Party have
launched a strategy of deception, projection, and a new generation of
brown shirts who fanatically believe that their violence is honorable,
and necessary, to save America from some kind of a Fourth Reich
perpetrated by the GOP." (Douglas Gibbs )
0 new messages