Newspaper shuts down free speech

Originally posted by Eladar
Homosexuality is immoral.

Why does this believe have to be a "phobe"?

Anyone who uses the term homophobe is by definition of bully. It is attempt to belittle and put down to shut the other person down. Liberals who use the term are a pathetic bunch.

"Homosexuality is immoral."
if an act doesn't hurt the one performing it, doesn't hurt anyone else, then it is not immoral.

"Why does this believe have to be a "phobe"?"
you believe it because you fear/hate the gays.

Originally posted by twhitehead
They are under no obligation to print their stuff either.

They pay the salaries, so it would be self destructive not to print the opinions of their editorialists.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
"Homosexuality is immoral."
if an act doesn't hurt the one performing it, doesn't hurt anyone else, then it is not immoral.

"Why does this believe have to be a "phobe"?"
you believe it because you fear/hate the gays.

Disapproval of anything doesn't a phobia make.

Originally posted by Eladar
http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/26/the-silencing-paper-will-limit-anti-gay-marriage-op-eds/

You want to voice your opinion on same sex marriage? Only if it is the correct opinion.

This is not an issue of free speech. It would only be an issue if the government had mandated that the newspaper couldn't print articles against homosexuality.

I think you misunderstand what freedom of speech is. The 1st Amendment was enacted to protect you from government censorship, not a private newspaper censorship. To suggest that the newspaper has to publish your views is a violation of their free speech. Now, you may disagree with it on moral grounds that they should but you can't use the free speech card here.

This ought to be a pretty cut and dry issue. The same should be said for a privately owned business that chooses not to service gays. That is their right to do so. It may have economic repercussions but it is their right to do so.

Edit: Laws under the category of 'Hate Crimes'. This is a violation of free speech. But not the newspaper.

Originally posted by Eladar
It seems to me that the paper should voice all opinions when it comes to political issues.

It's impossible to "voice all opinions."

Originally posted by normbenign
They pay the salaries, so it would be self destructive not to print the opinions of their editorialists.

Correct. But they are not obliged to do so - just wise to do so. There is a difference.

Originally posted by Eladar
The luck would only go one way. People who base their decisions of right and wrong based on the side of the issue being espoused are puppets.

Repeat what you are being told to repeat. Do it again! There you go, good puppet. Good puppet.

At least I hope you are a puppet and not a person who actually sees the evil and wants it anyhow. That would make you evil. I don't want to believe you are evil, just a duped puppet.

How do you know you are not a puppet?
Some Right Wing Nut seems to have his hand up your ass.

Originally posted by normbenign
Disapproval of anything doesn't a phobia make.

i agree.

you and him aren't homophobic because you disapprove.

you disapprove because you are homophobic