> But limiting one particular method to disperse speech is not limiting free speech as a concept; this entire argument is silly and just poisons the entire discussion.
Could you quote from the article where this argument is made?
I see these arguments:
1. Banning TikTok is similar to what China does. What China does is bad.
2. It will harm Republicans to ban a popular social media app
3. The act gives the executive too much discretion to ban modes of communication <- Main argument
It's literally in the title with and first highlighted paragraph. "We're going to be just like China and ban speech we're afraid of" is hard to interpret as any other way than "this is limiting free speech".
Could you quote from the article where this argument is made?
I see these arguments:
1. Banning TikTok is similar to what China does. What China does is bad.
2. It will harm Republicans to ban a popular social media app
3. The act gives the executive too much discretion to ban modes of communication <- Main argument