It's not illegal for a company to discriminate as long as that discrimination is not based on age, sex, gender identity, ethnic origin, national origin, race, disability status, religion or veteran status. In other words, discrimination against someone for political viewpoints is permitted because having a political viewpoint is not a protected status of a person. Thus why the left is able to ban and cancel anything based on "hate" but goes merrily along discriminating against anyone who disagrees with them.
Political affiliation is a protected class, it just doesn't get the same level of scrutiny.
But here we go again with the question, "When has a private entity availed itself of government benefit so much that it should be liable for discrimination practices based on alleged violation of someone's political speech rights?"
If a company chooses to operate within the United States it must offer services under the laws of the United States... which is the Constitution.
It's not illegal for a company to discriminate as long as that discrimination is not based on age, sex, gender identity, ethnic origin, national origin, race, disability status, religion or veteran status. In other words, discrimination against someone for political viewpoints is permitted because having a political viewpoint is not a protected status of a person. Thus why the left is able to ban and cancel anything based on "hate" but goes merrily along discriminating against anyone who disagrees with them.
The sheer brain prezel they go through man
It's because most of them are as dumb as a rock, especially the educated ones.
Making America Great Again is my religion, so these leftards are discriminating and should face legal consequences.
well, I'd argue that you're right but unfortunately that's not the law.
Political affiliation is a protected class, it just doesn't get the same level of scrutiny.
But here we go again with the question, "When has a private entity availed itself of government benefit so much that it should be liable for discrimination practices based on alleged violation of someone's political speech rights?"
It's the same thing as Section 230.
I absolutely agree with you and this is an excellent point!
I aim to please.
Lol.