LogFAQs > #886069053

Well, it's moral for business owners to run their businesses as they see fit provided that they're complying with zoning, environmental laws, etc.

darkknight109 posted...

You know, I find it very strange how much of a hard-on the internet generation has for so-called "censorship", when most of what is being complained about isn't in any way comparable to actual censorship.

Let's be clear: "censorship" is supposed to mean the active suppression of facts and/or dissent, usually undertaken to solidify the grasp on power held by some party or autocrat. Censorship frequently involves not just the stifling of discourse and the editing or silencing of troublesome voices, but also violence, intimidation, and sometimes downright murder. It is an action undertaken by totalitarian regimes, it causes hardship, and it impedes progress.

I'm always amused by your attempts to redefine a word or term to insist that something doesn't meet the criteria. Meanwhile, in reality, the kind of censorship most people are familiar with are the politeness-based kind (restrictions on language, nudity, etc) or pertaining to some social issue.

As for "impeding progress," I'm just going to laugh. Whenever you see something you dislike, you claim that it's against progress. In reality, many of the hard-left groups throughout history -- the so-called progressives in many cases -- have been *very* big on censorship. There's nothing inherent in censorship that makes it for or against progress and, in fact, restricting opinions you dislike would be a very useful tool in trying to change a society (which is why groups like the communists -- Soviets, CCP, etc -- used it so heavily). In fact, the social justice crowd causes frequently use forms of censorship -- whether it's petitioning business owners to restrict speech or threatening retaliation against people talking in public -- to push for "progress" (well, they're progressing well to a totalitarian state anyway)
---

(\/)(\/)|-|
In Zeus We Trust: All Others Pay Cash