Originally Posted by
Endus
You get a choice of two options, here;
A> The government already controls speech, as can be demonstrated by the many forms of speech that are not protected by the First Amendment, including, yes, child porn. You've stated you support this status quo, ergo, you support the government controlling speech, and have no business complaining about further laws in that regard, on that basis.
B> The actions of the government in restricting harmful speech cannot be construed as "controlling speech", as it blacklists harmful actions rather than whitelisting approved speech topics or the like. In this case, you need to retract the claim that a proposed anti-misinformation law would be "the government controlling speech", because this is entirely in line with the existing framings of unprotected speech, which you've now agreed are not "the government controlling speech".
It's A or B. And either way, you've tripped over yourself.