Trigger words: censorship (6) Censorship censored
Indicator sentences: That's not censorship, that's business.
Negotiation parts: [STA-CITE]>Boycotting a company because a head of theirs thinks things you don't like and arresting someone for the same reason is just as bad (they both threaten a persons livelihood), and if you do one you are welcoming the other [END-CITE]Completely untrue. Take Brendan Eich, for example. Let's say I decide that I no longer what to support his business due to that. I don't owe him my support. If my not buying his products "threatens" his livelihood, than he should have run a better business. I'm not shutting down his ability to speak his mind, nor am I restricting his freedom of speech in any way. I'm simply choosing not to buy/use the product. If he had been arrested for his speech, sure. If a crowd of angry people attacked him, that would be wrong. If people tried to take property that was his over that, again wrong. Speech and actions, just like everything else, has consequences, though. If you (or anyone else) becomes a liability to your employer, they we fire you or ask you to resign. His "speech" (in the form of his donations) made him a liability to the company, and they cut him loose. Yes, forcibly silencing someone's speech is wrong, but declining to support it is not silencing it. Both individuals you mentioned were not censored, their respective employers simply judged that they were now a liability to the company. As such, they were removed, limiting that liability. they were fired in an attempt to censor them, after people complained and whined in a childish manor to their employers because they don't like the persons opinions so they punish that person the only way they know how, get them fired jd2020 was also just fired and censored for supporting free speech and opposing censorship I'm not even sure what you mean here. I seriously doubt anybody "whined to their employers" about the actions of the above named people. What they DID do was make it clear that they would not choose to give money to an organization that employs racists or bigots. It's their money, and they have every right to choose who they give their money to. The companies involved (Mozilla and the NBA, respectively) decided that employing people who were publicly seen to hold racist or bigoted opinions would hurt their business, so they acted to correct that.