Please read USC Title 18 section 242. Deprivation of Rights Under The Color of Law. No one has yet to use it.
I believe we should have the right to sue News sources that tell lies constantly.
1 Like
If I understand it correctly, repeal the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act. The original Smith-Mundt Act banned the use of propaganda on the American population. The Modern version of it, passed in 2012, essentially allows propaganda to be used on the American population.
1 Like
I agree. Didnât Obama sneak the amendment into the 2013 NDAA?
ANDâŚTHIS- Directly from Israeli PM.
âStrong Actionâ to be taken against anyone who tries to BOYCOTT Israel? In OUR Country?
This is a problem. I think it needs to be addressed.
1 Like
[quote=âAdam Garrie, post:1, topic:35, full:true, username:adamgarrieâ].
Proposed amendment to Civil Rights Act
The Civil Rights Act has grown rather than shrunk in scope since its initial passage in 1964. Most notably, in 1972, President Nixon signed Title IX into law - an amendment to the Civil Rights Act that protected women and girls from discrimination in educational facilities that receive federal funding.
Therefore, there is a clear precedent for amending and expanding the Civil Rights Act and related legislation.
The inclusion of free speech protections in an amendment to the Civil Rights Act is both necessary and beneficial in the fight against the censorship-industrial complex. Title II guarantees civil rights even in privately owned facilities while Title IX demonstrates the public policy impact of amendments to the original Act.
[/quote]
I would recommend that either in this proposed amendment or as its own that Title IX and, frankly, any other section that is tied to federal funding is revised to remove the federal funding requirement.
Reason: If the Department of Education is significantly altered and items of education are returned to the states, will there still be Federal funding to require the schools to do these things?
Iâm unsure what can be used to require continued alignment to these protections, but it is a conversation that is needed.
I think what we need is to stop formation of a protected class. This ide that someone needs rotection sets up a situation where the protected class, abuses itâs status. That happens ALOT.
The thing to due is simply not have a Proteected class. All of us should be protected equally under the Constitution period.
Now Our Constitution prevents Government from inhibiting Free Speech, But we also must realize the temptation of government to work by proxy.
Free Speech cannot be curtailed by any gov or coerce anyone and or corporation to censon or limit speech.
Also make it illegal for Gov to work by proxy with Corporations (Who are people too) to limit speech or censor. This is actually already in the Constitution though.
Itâs hard to imagine that our Government would be going against the Constitution the way it is, but it is.
We do have to fix the âEnemy Withinâ who have no concern regarding the Constitution.
1 Like
I do agree there is a potential of misuse.
But we are not that far separated from a time when people were not treated equally.
I donât want to say schools, or other places, wonât continue to do whatâs right. But whatâs to stop them from:
- removing female sports teams
- not providing equal education to someone with disabilities
- this includes physical (ex: blind), medical (diabetic and need an IEP on file for it to protect the child
- ), learning disabilities (maybe they need an IEP to give them more time on a test or to provide written notes).
There are costs to providing these things. And if they are not required, its really easy to remove them from the budget.
Itâs already being misused and that is why Trans men are finding there way onto Womenâs teams.
In ways, somehow we have all become âvictimsâ and want protection. But what is causing people to become victims?
People need to be encouraged to be independant individuals not dependent people in a collectivist trap.
The Personâs with disabilities act is not going away and if people have common sense they realize that sport must be seperated by sex.
We must streamline this government, and cut unnecessary waste and programs that benefit the few.
We have so much legislation it is easy for me to say that we donât need anymore laws passed at all. At this time the only laws that could be passed are ones limiting your freedom.
We have a lot of work to do. To simplifiy and shink the Federal Gov. Itâs out of control.
We must also do something about the PONZI scheme called the Federal Reserve it is the heart of all corruption. Once our money is corrupted, the people will also be corrupted as well.
The Federal Reserve debt is of a fraudulant nature this is the first thing to be understood. We should as a country throw off the shackles of this nuanced slavery.
The CIA also should be reformed because itâs main function is to destroy any and all things that get in the banks and Wall Streets way.
Lotâs of things need to happen. Lots.
Nullify Section 230.
When you add all of the protected classes in america, it literally protects everyone EXCEPT white heterosexual working class males. So basically, the argument that you want to expand an inherently racist and sexist law, seems to me that we arent improving free speech at all. We should revoke this law and replace it with something that protects ALL LEGAL CITIZENS of the US to speak freely without censorship on any platform, digital or physical, in public or private settings, regardless of content.
Your very thorough and carefully crafted idea is well published. But i think the premise of the argument and resolution is starting off assuming that we should continue to have protected classes to begin with. Everyone should be protected. Not a specific group of individuals, unless that group is legal US citizens.
I fully agree that AIPAC needs to removed as well as all lobbyists. We cannot have honest congressional representatives when they are being told by anyone but WE THE PEOPLE who elected them. Lobbying needs to be stopped. Our representatives were not meant to get rich by accepting money from lobbyists instead of following the wishes of the people who put them in office.
1 Like
I believe it would also benefit the social media complex to make verified identities required for every profile. If your name and face are attached most people would be less likely to be hateful , rude, or antagonistic towards others. It would curtail trolling.
This is a great idea however you have focused on only one bill of rights protection and should protect them all!
Change from
Change to
Addition of Protected Class: Section 201(a) is amended by inserting after ânational originâ the following: â, or individualâs exercise of rights identified and protected under the bill of Rights Amendment to the Constitutionâ.
Other countries that try to censor americanâs free speech by fining companies for censoring legal speech should face tariffs.
2 Likes
Your proposal to amend the Civil Rights Act to address free speech is an interesting approach @adamgarrie.
However, it might not fully capture the complexities involved in the interaction between free speech rights and business interests, particularly in scenarios where speech disrupts commerce.
The real crux of the issue, especially with Big Techâs role in censorship, seems to lie in the broader relationship between corporate power and state influence. The 5th Circuitâs decision in the case involving Robert F. Kennedy Jr., where it was revealed that government agencies influenced Big Tech to censor content, yet the suit was dismissed for lacking legal standing, underscores this problem. This indicates that there might be a significant gap in how current laws address corporate actions that align with government censorship objectives, often under the guise of commercial rights.
A more effective strategy could involve crafting a comprehensive legislative framework that clearly delineates the separation between corporate entities and state functions, ensuring that thereâs a legal basis for courts to address:
-
Overreach by corporations in areas where they act as de facto public forums or utilities for speech.
-
Collusion between government and private companies to bypass constitutional protections.
Such legislation would aim to:
-
Clarify the legal responsibilities of corporations in relation to free speech, particularly when they are positioned as the modern public square.
-
Strengthen judicial oversight to ensure that citizensâ rights under the First Amendment are not undermined by corporate policies or government partnerships.
This would help ensure that freedom of speech is protected in a manner thatâs both robust against government overreach and sensitive to the operational needs of businesses. Iâve proposed a more detailed approach to this issue in my policy proposal âEstablish the Separation of the Corporatocracy and the Stateâ here, which seeks to address these concerns in a more comprehensive way.
1 Like
There r so many replyâs I canât read them all. But what in this and free speech, takes the part away about threats to kill people online or hurt them. The way itâs worded it sounds like it gives permission and the employers canât judge them on that. Saying your thoughts and feelings is one thing. But threats that u put the world to see is different. And u never know if u should act or take them serious.
Hate and racism has torn this country apart this election by politicians. Saying things and clipping videos that are not true and people believe it. Which inspired hatred Iâve never seen before. That type of freedom should not be allowed by public figures.
Social media platforms have already been proven to have censored by the Biden Administration, especially during Covid, effection millions of lives. Nobody has the right to label something disinformation because with free speech, no one party can silence another. Social media must be a platform for all or be held fully, legally responsible for what is published if they want to make decisions on what can be published. You cant have it both ways.
Proposal: Restoring Liberty and Civil Rights
Title: Reclaiming Freedom: Policies to Protect Constitutional Rights and Civil Liberties
Introduction:
The erosion of constitutional rights and civil liberties through censorship, government propaganda, and dehumanizing policies threatens the foundation of American democracy. This proposal seeks to dismantle the âCensorship-Industrial Complexâ and enforce transparency, accountability, and adherence to constitutional principles. By restoring trust and safeguarding individual freedoms, America can once again exemplify a high-trust, rights-respecting society.
The Ascent: Identifying Core Challenges and Necessary Reforms
1. Combat the Censorship-Industrial Complex
Develop policies to dismantle coordinated efforts by private and governmental entities to suppress free speech and restrict access to diverse viewpoints.
2. End Government Propaganda
Mandate transparency and prohibit the use of public funds for propaganda that distorts facts or manipulates public opinion.
3. Protect Free Expression in the Digital Age
Enforce robust protections for free speech on social media platforms, ensuring government and corporate entities cannot suppress lawful expression.
4. Defend Against Dehumanization
Introduce anti-dehumanization policies that prevent the marginalization or vilification of individuals based on political, social, or cultural beliefs, fostering a culture of mutual respect.
The Summit: Peak Advantages of Constitutional Adherence
5. Rebuilding a High-Trust Society
Transparency, accountability, and the protection of civil liberties lay the foundation for a society where individuals trust institutions and each other, promoting unity and progress.
The Descent: Practical Applications and Policies
6. Enforce Transparency in Government Communications
Require all government communications to be subject to oversight, with clear labeling of informational versus persuasive content, and ban covert influence campaigns.
7. Institute Civil Liberties Protections for Digital Platforms
Enact legislation that ensures digital platforms operate as neutral public forums, safeguarding users from censorship based on lawful speech.
8. Create an Independent Oversight Body
Establish an independent entity to investigate and expose abuses of power related to censorship, propaganda, and civil rights violations, ensuring accountability across all levels of government.
9. Empower Whistleblowers and Journalistic Freedoms
Strengthen protections for whistleblowers and journalists who expose corruption, censorship, or unconstitutional actions, recognizing their role in upholding democracy.
10. Mandate Education on Constitutional Rights
Incorporate education on civil liberties, free speech, and constitutional rights into public school curriculums to empower future generations to uphold these principles.
Conclusion:
Protecting and restoring constitutional rights requires dismantling harmful systems of censorship and propaganda while fostering transparency and accountability. These measures will ensure that America remains a beacon of liberty and a high-trust society where individual freedoms are respected and protected.
The Tree of Relief - Final Thought:
âA nation rooted in liberty flourishes when the rights of all are upheld. By nurturing the principles of transparency, accountability, and mutual respect, we can reclaim the promise of freedom for every citizen.â
I recently made a post on the 1st ammendment, I would appreciate any voting and feedback