They're biased against something, because they delete legal content.

Who cares that it’s legal though? You’re on their property, committed to abiding by their terms of service even.

If you’re hosting a garden party and one of the guests has become disruptive to everyone else, are you not allowed to demand they cease their behavior or leave your property just because their angry ranting is not illegal speech?

You’re totally within your right to say “I’m out, this party sucks anyway, you guys don’t want to have honest debate” but it’s a little absurd to force the property owner to allow you to stick around when you are no longer welcome.

Actually, Florida doesn't own the property of the private citizens whether its the network fiber, routers, or buildings which contain these items. If you can't justify such a capricious law then maybe your intention is malicious?

This is a first amendment violation. It should be obvious how the state differs from corporate entities or persons.

If you don't like it, just build your own state. smh.

Do you feel the same way about telephones? How about electricity? Is it out of the realm of possibility that a conscientious electrical supplier might not want to power a racist's computer?

Electricity is analogous to the the road that you traveled on to the way to the party.

> Is it out of the realm of possibility that a conscientious electrical supplier might not want to power a racist's computer?

Isn’t this the case that these same people are making for why ISPs should NOT be neutral, even though they’re much more like electricity and roads than private garden parties?

And both Ukraine and Russia say they are being attacked.

I think there is real bias (and in the West it's more biased against conservatives and some minority groups while it's different elsewhere, depends mostly on the dominant ideology) and there's faux discrimination to get victim points to trade in for control.