YouTube now banning doctors for daring to question transgenderism… Trannies the new “untouchables” who can never be questioned

Monday, November 11, 2019
By Paul Martin

by: JD Heyes
NaturalNews.com
Monday, November 11, 2019

Once again, the social media and tech behemoths, now that they’ve made it to the top of the heap, continue to exercise their Stalin-like control over what users can and, importantly, cannot, post on their platforms.

YouTube is in the hot seat this time for censoring a medical doctor because she dared to question the current cultural holy grail for the Left: Transgenderism.

As LifeSite News reports:

“See, if you want to cut off a leg or an arm, you’re mentally ill, but if you want to cut off healthy breasts or a penis, you’re transgender.”

Those are the words of Dr. Michelle Cretella, a pediatrician with many years’ experience and the executive director of the American Academy of Pediatricians, in a Daily Signal video published in 2017.

It’s a sentence YouTube will not allow the doctor to say about children and gender identity issues.

Talk about rational; Cretella is spot-on. But no; the Left-wing speech Nazis at YouTube will not allow anyone to question the wisdom of self-mutilation over what really only amounts to gender confusion.

The Daily Signal only recently learned that the video of Cretella was taken offline and replaced instead with an incredulous message: “This video has been removed for violating YouTube’s policy on hate speech.”

‘Hate speech.’ See how that works? One person’s rational thought and sound reasoning is defined by others as somehow being “hateful,” thus, not allowed.

Our founding fathers never thought that the Legislative and Judicial Branches would tolerate limitations on free speech, contained in the very first amendment to the Constitution for a reason (it, and the other basic freedom guarantees of freedom of the press, religion, assembly, and petitioning of government were that important).

After all, free speech was acknowledged to be a pillar of a free society; if citizens were not permitted by fiat or law to freely speak, then competing ideas would never be aired and policies debated so that the best solutions could be found.

Hate speech was not ‘disallowed’ by our founders

But then, free speech was never intended to be just for political debate; it was always supposed to also serve as a platform for free expression — of thought, impression, and opinion.

The ability to convey one’s thoughts and ideas freely, without persecution or punishment, comes with risks — the main one being that not everyone will agree. That’s fine; the First Amendment does not require that all speech be agreed upon, only that it be permitted. Feelings aren’t a factor. Disagreement isn’t supposed to be a disqualification. Being uncomfortable with what someone else is saying also isn’t grounds for limiting someone’s speech.

And yet, as we see again, the social media giants use that excuse all the time to censor differences of opinion and thought. They, like other Leftists, justify it by calling uncomfortable speech they disagree with “hate speech,” which is actionable and, thus, not permitted.

The Rest…HERE

Comments are closed.

Join the revolution in 2018. Revolution Radio is 100% volunteer ran. Any contributions are greatly appreciated. God bless!

Follow us on Twitter