Everyone who supports censorship only ever supports it for other people. They support silencing "dangerous" voices. The implication here is that they could never be construed as having a "dangerous" voice. They enjoy very much the ability to express themselves how they see fit. When these same individuals support government sponsored censorship, they're advocating for the act or threat of violence to be committed against people who say or believe things they don't like. Of course this is rationalized easily "I don't like it because it is DANGEROUS". What is dangerous though? Who decides? At one point in American history, abolitionist ideas were considered dangerous. Will those crying for censorship of "misinformation" be looked upon by history the same way we view those who begged the government to silence those who advocated for an end to slavery? Anyone who swore an oath to the Constitution should endeavor to ensure that they are.
https://chrisbray.substack.com/p/our-other-free-speech-tradition?s=r
Read the about section for info about the community. Basically it is a community for ideological Americans (my definition is basically anyone who digs the declaration of independence and is a fan of the non-aggression principle) that are covid-19 vaccine free. Although it might seem a little unorthodox, my hope is that any members of the community that happen to be interested in marriage can find lifelong partners here. If one happens to be a U.S. citizen and the other doesn't, it could be a way to bring people together that might never have found each other otherwise in a place where we still have a chance to return love of liberty to a position of cultural dominance. On this note, I might eventually post information about immigration policy as it relates to marriage as well as discussion of legal challenges to vaccine mandates for immigrants, especially if they deny religious accommodation requests and pin them here.
Feel free to post and discuss stuff about any topic you're ...
Fitness advice is generally doled out by people who perform very well at a particular sport. One of the problems with this is that performance != health. Then you have people who perform like shit, but have credentials. These folks talk about what is 'healthy but can't grasp what every good Austrian econ aficionado knows, namely that things like health have a large subjective component. If you're trying to build an exercise program for health I wrote an article that tries to lay out some key principles to help you out while trying to avoid the two aforementioned traps.
https://h2fman.substack.com/p/exercise-for-health