quote:

Originally posted by Southflorida-law:

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:...
...It's about the suppression of ideas and discussion. It could as well be about Amazon removing, say, religious videos that decry the theory of evolution.

So what new government regulation or law would you like to see passed that would stop private companies (citizens) from doing this?

<sarcasm>yes yes yes, we need MORE BIG GUBBBIMENT </sarcasm>

Hopefully ensigmatic can lay out his grand scheme for injecting fairness (as he sees it) into every household and business.

But if ONLY WE HAD STOOD UP FOR THE ANTI-VAXXERS!

Then they came the FLAT-EARTERS!!!

Then the HOARDERS!!!!

Oh the INHUMANITY OF IT ALL!!!!

All to justify wanting to cancel Amazon Prime.

quote:

Originally posted by 226Reasons:
Ultimately this is a silencing move. If they were taking down pro gun documentaries would you feel the same? We should all be concerned.

Are you mad because Amazon doesn't sell firearm components and ammunition?

I love it when a self proclaimed "libertarian" gets their knickers all twisted when someone else doesn't support their cause.

That ship you see sailing away? That is the boat you missed when understanding what a true libertarian stands for.

I'm curious about the phrase "clearing out your wish lists" Does that mean you are going to purchase everything on it before you leave? That will really show them... If it just means deleting everything, why do you care? Amazon already knows about it so???

I'm curious about the measles thing. If your kid is vaccinated, why are you worried? I would venture to say that 99% of the people in the area have been vaccinated. why is there an outbreak?

Is there a measles booster shot that is supposed to be taken at some point? If so, isn't it the person who didn't get the booster shots fault? Why blame the parent who is making the best decision they can?

It would help if the medical community conducted business in a respectable manner. I recently had a tetanus booster shot administered. While in the room waiting for the doc to stop by I read the paperwork that came with the vaccine. Turns out I was also given something for whooping cough. I wasn't informed in advance. When I asked, I was told that there was a rise in cases so they were just including it.

They didn't understand why I was pissed.

To the pro vaccine folks in this thread: You are making an informed opinion about vaccinations based on your knowledge. Other people are making decisions that are different based on their research and are doing what they think is best. How about climbing off your fucking high horse and try to change their mind with an informed argument instead of shouting and calling them names? Tell me how your reaction is different from the insanity that is the liberals shouting down conservatives at universities?

So much fail in this thread...

quote:

So much fail in this thread..

Very true. But the fail has nothing to do with vaccination. Lots of virtue signaling, on both sides. Pathetic.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by bryan11:
Glad I'm not the only one bothered by this censorship. What topics will next be removed?

Apparently we're the only two--at least here on SF.

I'm kind of surprised. We've a bunch of members that claim themselves to be essentially libertarians.

Oh well, I'm sure they'll show up when Amazon drops the hammer on something important.

You made this remark less than three and a half hours after the topic was posted. Just what exactly did you think was going to happen in those 200 or so minutes? Ya wanna tell me why you're passing insults over nothing at all?

quote:

Originally posted by parallel:

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
*** snip ***
Sometimes one must use the critical thinking thing between the ears to grasp the point being made. You appear to be using it to avoid grasping the point.

And to be belittling and insulting about it. Both of which I've studiously avoided doing. Good job.

Hardly... case in point bolded below.

I wasn't insulting or belittling anybody. I was pointing out that certain suppression of thought was apparently all right with many who claim to be civil libertarians.

quote:

Originally posted by parallel:
We haven't been jumping up and down throwing a tantrum like you have so we obviously can only CLAIM to be libertarians.

"Tantrum?" All I did was:

• Point out behaviour on the part of Amazon I felt unacceptable and I wasn't going to accept it
  
• Agree with a follow-up's comment that there didn't seem to be many others who felt the same
  
• Follow-up to members who wished to argue my position. Without ad hominems.
  

That's "throwing a tantrum," is it?

quote:

Originally posted by parallel:
The worst kind of tyranny is that from those who believe they're righteous.

Oh puh-lease. I never so much as suggested Amazon didn't have the right to do what they did.

quote:

Originally posted by parallel:
Of course, you have every right to take your ball and go home, and the rest of have every right to grasp the concept of "liberty and justice for all."

That sure sounded nice. Got no idea what you're on about. Nobody has for one moment suggested anybody's liberty be curtailed. (Reading ahead: Somebody's about to, though.)

quote:

Originally posted by parallel:

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
The danger isn't in a private company making choices. The danger is in a politician making the choices for them.

This I agree with, but as I'm not a mind reader I hesitate to say that this is what happened.

Yeah, you're right. It's probably mere coincidence Bezos did that after CNN published a hit piece on them and, again, coincidentally, Adam Schiff sent them a letter about it.

quote:

Originally posted by 226Reasons:
A lot of irony here. As gun owners do you trust the gov't has your best interest at heart as to the 2A, or do we have to fight to keep them honest? On another hand, everyone should just trust that vaccines are 100% safe? When the gov't protects vaccine makers from wrongdoing you should definitely question why.

Wasn't really part of my point, but, since it's been raised...

Personally, while not an "anti-vaxxer," per se, I do have my doubts. A perfect example was last year's (I think it was?) influenza vaccine. IIRC, estimates put it at about ±20% effective? Yet "they" were still encouraging everybody to get it. Discussion of course came up here. Some of us asked "Why?" One of the reasons given was "can lessen the impact of the strains against which it doesn't protect." Huh?

That was a line commonly heard from "medical professionals" on the "news."

When asked to explain their reasoning: <crickets>

My scepticism is reinforced by western medicine having been caught in numerous misdirections, mistakes, omissions and outright lies.

So, yeah: While not an anti-vaxxer, put me firmly in the "vaccine agnostic" camp. I believe certain vaccines have proven their worth, and no mistake. Others I'm no so sure about.

quote:

Originally posted by Southflorida-law:

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:...
...It's about the suppression of ideas and discussion. It could as well be about Amazon removing, say, religious videos that decry the theory of evolution.

So what new government regulation or law would you like to see passed that would stop private companies (citizens) from doing this?

None. It is their right as a private business to carry the products they wish. What gave you the idea I was calling for legislation or regulation?

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
While these companies are indeed private, they are also establishing a monopoly on information.

While Amazon is treading dangerously close to violating anti-trust laws in other regards, they hardly have a monopoly on information. With regard to these movies, they are simply an online Blockbuster. Nothing more.

Be careful with that one. E.g.: They've all but decimated the retail book and music industries. Ask anybody where they go to buy books, music and movies (those not streamed), these days. I bet you'll hear "Amazon" is much as all others combined. If not more.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:
Now, if we're talking Google, then I'd agree, and I'd guess that the day is soon coming that Congress begins to regulate them and I'd not be opposed to it.

Why? There are other search engines. There are other map providers. There are other mobile OS makers. There are other email, hosting and web services providers. How is Google's dominance in those markets any different from Amazon's?

In fact: From a price and convenience standpoint: I found it a lot easier to walk away from Google/Alphabet than I expect I will Amazon. E.g.: I just cancelled my automatic re-supply of saw palmetto with Amazon. Not certain how I'm going to replace that.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by bryan11:
Glad I'm not the only one bothered by this censorship. What topics will next be removed?

Apparently we're the only two--at least here on SF.

I'm kind of surprised. We've a bunch of members that claim themselves to be essentially libertarians.

Oh well, I'm sure they'll show up when Amazon drops the hammer on something important.

You made this remark less than three and a half hours after the topic was posted. Just what exactly did you think was going to happen in those 200 or so minutes? Ya wanna tell me why you're passing insults over nothing at all?

Obviously, as per my earlier reply, I did not feel it an insult. I guess that's an argument I'm not going to win, so I'll concede the point, retract the statement and call it a day.