I agree.Puro.Esq. said:I have no problem with PRIVATE companies (Yahoo, Ebay, PayPal) restricting what content they choose to allow. If the online thesaurus wants to remove all reference to tobacco, conservatism or religion it is their right to do so.
Back to your original post . . .if they do not want to include tobacco related products on their thesaurus they have that right . . . just as you have the right post (or not post) anything on your blog site.
What are you 12?!?Aaron said:I just emailed thesaurus.com to note the omission.
AND I offered to write up an entry if they wanted one. I put my money and my time and efforts where my beliefs are and don't expect taxation and distribution by the California legislature to fairly allocate those resources as do my left-of-center Californians.
But I'll report on thesaurus.com's response to see if it's a sin of commission or a sin of omission.
Would I legally force them to add it? No. I'm more of a libertarian than a conservative. I have no problem with bringing outrageous policies to public notice and let the company feel the pressure and properly respond to the market.
Have any of the Californian herfers in the Bay Area written even once about the new laws in Calabasas? Or is it because they aren't personally affected that it doesn't matter?
:u BRAVO!par said:I tend to agree. You'd get more symphaty and engagement if you stopped insulting folks who live in california. Califascist is a childish and somewhat moronic term.
You aren't here looking for a debate or a different point of view. You are posting here to eschew a viewpoint which you hold so dear and morally superior that all other viewpoints and beliefs are being subjected to namecalling and ridicule. If you gave two cents about freedoms you'd adhere to the principle of defending freedoms. You would fight for people to have the right to disagree with you and not fight to have them "step in line and brainwashed into your version of the truth".
i personally object to the modern form of political debate which to me have stooped to such a low level that it's more about character assinations and labeling than about carrying a discussion about what should be done or what the problem is. The blogosphere is full of e-thugs who doesn't want to do anything but hear themselves and esphew their version of how everyone else must conform to their beliefs.
Sorry, this is not what i do. I prefer to exchange beliefs and ideas and respect an opposing view instead of trying to tear down their character.