Benji, I am still waiting for your suggestions what should be done to fix America's problems. Unless you think there is nothing wrong.
When somebody advocates where I can respond for my fellow citizens (but not themselves) to face the prospect of jail time or worse for the use of an essential human right on the basis of "it'll work this time, trust me bro" I do feel a little entitled to ask questions and possibly even object on their behalf without having to propose a counter "solution" such a person would find acceptable since I think that further maintaining rights and liberal democracy is the solution, not continuing to eliminate them and pursuing despotism.
You seem to blindly trust an Obama or Trump or
Robespierre not to use the power you want to give them, I don't, given well, you know, the history and all.
Assume for the sake of argument that the Fairness Doctrine actually did work as you think it did, if it was reinstated it wouldn't apply to anything on the internet, it wouldn't apply to Fox News, CNN or MSNBC, it wouldn't apply to any newspapers, etc. You know who it would really change? Public broadcasting, who would be forced to platform Trump supporters and similar. This surely can't be your intended goal, to make the news coverage most likely aligned with your worldview extremely more pro-Trump and open to radical views than it is currently and has been for forty years. If you want to expand it to reach all those things then you're targeting the First Amendment itself by beginning back down the path to compelled speech. And if your concern is the recent ruling, I honestly can't fathom why you would want red states to start prosecuting people who advocate solely for abortion now that it's left up to each state.
If your proposal only has foreseeable downsides why should I (or anyone else) want it? Because you think it
might work, even though you can't articulate an upside, so we're obligated to have our rights restricted for you? A very odd request I think.
You seem to think that freedom of speech, press, thought, assembly, etc. are trifling things that should be cast aside so self-chosen elite like Donald Trump can use the state to pursue those who offend him or threaten his power. I consider this to be rather short-sighted and ignorant given again, the history. Especially if your concern is protecting abortion rights considering advocacy is the only reasonable democratic path to do so unless your interest is in merely attempting to force a minority view (or even a majority view though not in this case) on the populace by restricting their rights. Which again,
the history.
