Person A: it’s to protect marginalised people from the hate mongering that’s happening online.
Me: This argument can be applied to any form of conservative speech. I'm going to go with NOT banning conservative speech because of an allegation that it goes after marginalized people.
Person A: if conservative speech consists of fear-mongering against marginalised people, that says everything we need to know about conservatives :)
Me: That is the majority of what conservatives believe. But would you censor all conservative speech? Yes or no. Either it will be legal to say speech that affects marginalized people or it will be illegal to state conservative opinions. You got to pick. I pick free speech (I don't support banning books).
Person A: i would censor bigots, without a second thought.
Me: At least you are honest; you would censor republican leaners (about half of the country) because you believe they are bigoted.So then if you censor the republican party (whom you would believe all of their opinions are bigoted, so to you, they are bigots), then what would be the opposition to democrats? Is one party rule what you want where all oppression is minimized?
"Banning hate speech" is code for, "banning all speech we think is hateful, aka conservative speech."
Protect free speech! And republicans; until you eliminate all the anti BDS laws in your state that make you sign a pledge stating that you won't boycott Israel and until you guys support the right to burn an American flag and the right to sit for the national anthem to protest police brutality, you guys don't believe in free speech either; so spare me your fake outrage.
I'm a free speech absolutist, and very few people are.