Not at all. Clearly you aren't familiar with my work if you think you're going to get me with this type of flawed logic.

I am making one argument and only one. I was prevented from commenting an actual historical truth on an issue on Facebook.

Here's where you went wrong, you've assumed my politics and/or political learnings. You have no clue whether I lean conservative or liberal or if I'm somewhere in the middle. But your question certainly demonstrates you're assuming that I lean left and that you'll somehow trip me up with the "Trump supporter," challenge.

First, there's no "her truth," or "my truth." There's "the truth," and then there are perspectives and opinions regarding it. Truth, the sky is blue. You may see it as light blue and I may see it more as a medium blue. One truth, 2 perspectives.

Second, I would absolutely support a Trump supporter's right to speak their mind. Same with a Kamala supporter. I'm neither a child nor a moron. I can handle opinions that differ from my own.

In fact, it's crucial to protect our freedom to express unpopular ideas, it's how society progresses. An example I use frequently is abolitionism. It was once very unpopular to think Blacks should not be enslaved. Well, if the freedom to express that didn't exist, I and my family would still be in SC somewhere on a field or in the kitchen.

Regardless of whether Facebook agreed or not that my comment was "the truth" (which it was), I should be free to express myself as long as that expression doesn't offend legal limits (and "legal limits" means inciting violence, hate speech, etc)