Reply to Free speech and the American University Campus

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Free speech and the American University Campus"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Hate and dangerous speech is not protected. The 1st amendment comes with both regulations and responsibilities.[/quote]

Except that opposing the idea of defund the police, criticizing the utter chaos at our border, and questioning the wisdom of hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery for minors  is not "hate and dangerous speech."  That's the whole point - YOU don't get to label something "hate speech" simply because you disagree with it and want to silence it.  [/quote]

Free speech suggests that I can label it any way I want. It’s the government that can’t do it. Are people not allowed to oppose what other people have to say?[/quote]

This.  You are free to speak.  I am free to think you are an idiot.  As to refuse to deal with you because of what you speak.

[/quote]

DP.  Agreed.  And that absolutely works [b]both ways[/b].  What you are not free to do is try and prevent me from speaking and prevent others from hearing me speak.  Just go sulk in a corner if you can't handle opposing viewpoints.[/quote]

But trying to prevent you from speaking if your views are abhorrent to me *is* my speech.  Just like boycotting chick FIL a for their stance is my right.  Now I may not be successful. You can laugh at me when my pathetic protest does no good.  But I am free to do it and by speech, convince others to join me.  [/quote]

Sure, but that's not what we're talking about.  Boycott all you want.  What you're not entitled to do is interrupt a speaker or prevent others from hearing a speaker.  And when it's turned around on you, you're the first one to bray about "free speech"!  [/quote]

You are conflating decorum with speech.  The govt has to let you speak.  Individuals do not.  They can shout you down if they don’t like what you are saying.   Your options are to give up and whine, shout over them, speak at a location where you control the audience, ask people to sign some kind of rules of engagement when entering the private event etc.  But if you want to speak in public, you have to live with the consequences.  Now if the protesters start doing things that are illegal, agitate to throw the book at them if you want.  Like if they start doxxing people or threatening them with violence or brandishing a gun or whatever.

The civil rights protesters in the 60’s were actually breaking the law and decided to take the consequences (arrested) but they decided to do it anyway.  Their cause was just, but they took risks (including with their lives) to protest.  That is their right.  [/quote]

I have no doubt that if you were trying to speak in public and were shouted down by protesters, you'd be outraged about your first amendment rights being violated.  At any rate, we're not talking about people just randomly speaking in public.  We're talking about invited speakers on campus who are then mobbed by protesters, often violently, preventing others from getting to hear their speech.  Or invited speakers who are then DISinvited due to protesters pressuring the administration - because they don't agree with the speaker and want to silence them.

Have you forgotten about the YLS idiots?  Middlebury?  Berkeley?   :roll: [/quote]

DP.  You don’t seem to understand what a constitutional amendment is.  A mob shouting someone down has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the first amendment.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, the relentless Republican campaign against free speech continues with the “Don’t Say Gay” bill and a raft of legislation prohibiting Americans from any reasoned debate about multi-billion dollar aid US to Israel.

Also, Republicans who cynically whine about mobs on college campuses continue their relentless campaign to expand their campaigns of armed terror against (often Republican) election officials who dare to state the obvious truth that the 2020 election wasn’t stolen by space lasers. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics