Take control of your brain health with Staying Sharp! Try it today.

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
184
Views

Re: Free Speech

184 Views
Message 11 of 101

@rk9152 wrote:

@MIseker wrote:
If the content of the speech isnt incendiary, there wont be a problem. You are saying, in effect, you dont want
YOUR speech to contain one bone of political correctness. Politically correct speech is used when one chooses not to inflame the emotions of a listener. If a speaker decides to promote inflamatory speech or incendiary ideas, they are shirking THEIR responsiblity to calmly bring people to their point of view,, or at least convey the message in an inoffensive manner. But then, I am talking about a real speech whose intent is to win people over. You are talking about allowing a loud mouth to make inflammatory comment, goad the crowd, or outright lie without consequence.

incendiary is in the eyes of the beholder


Not even close, and thank God SCOTUS long ago determined there WERE rules for limiting "free speech" to that which does not harm or incite to harm, like the 'GOOD NAZIs" Der Trumper praised just before one of them committed mayhem and murder with his car.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
184
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
185
Views

Re: Free Speech

185 Views
Message 12 of 101

@rk9152 wrote:

 

Still can't get away from Trump can you?

 

The issue is college kids being exposed to the entire spectrum of political ideology and making their own decisions - as opposed to have their exposure dictated by biased administrators and mobs.


I guess the "real issue" is that some so-called conservatives (trump supporters) would like to see  college kids exposed to right wing "mobs" (like the KKK in Charlottesville).


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
185
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
194
Views

Re: Free Speech

194 Views
Message 13 of 101

@rk9152 wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:

Once again Republicans are trying to pervert the law for their Nazi ends.

FREE SPEECH in THIS country means THE GOVERNMENT cannot censure speech.

 

- that's how we discovered the War in Vietnam was a politically motivated disaster from day one and nobody in positions of power believed we had even the remotest chance of "winning". It's how we learned about Watergate being a HUGE Republican perversion of Justice and how we learned JrBush LIED us into Iraq and Afghanistan with no intention of "winning".

 

Says NOTHING about the private sector determining who gets to speak or write in THEIR venues.

 

Republicans want it to mean they can hire Nazis, KKK and White Supremacists to foment riots on College Campuses to rev up their low information-low IQ base and give higher education a "bad name" in the eyes of their base. If they had any intention of actually INFORMING the public, they would never have created FOX, which lies on everything except the sports scores.


Can you not calmly discuss the value of free speech in universities without all the angry ranting about the Kluxers, Nazis, Bush, Fox and the rest??


Not until right wing extremists, the KKK, Nazis, racists, white supremacists, fascists, Grotesquely Obscene Pedophiles/Plutocrats, and borderline treasonous neo-confederates stop making excuses for why they are in control of the formerly respectable republican party and the treasonous moron in the bleephole formerly referred to as the "white house"...

44>dolt45
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
194
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
193
Views

Re: Free Speech

193 Views
Message 14 of 101

@Olderscout66 wrote:

Once again Republicans are trying to pervert the law for their nazi ends.

FREE SPEECH in THIS country means THE GOVERNMENT cannot censur speech.

 

- that's how we discovered the War in Vietnam was a politically motivated disaster from day one and nobody in positions of power believed we had even the remotest chance of "winning". It's how we learned about Watergate being a HUGE Republican perversion of Justice and how we learned jrbush LIED us into Iraq and Afghanistan with no intention of "winning".

 

Says NOTHING about the private sector determining who gets to speak or write in THEIR venues.

 

Republicans want it to mean they can hire Nazis, KKK and White Supremacists to forment riots on College Campuses to rev up their lofo base and give higher education a "bad name" in the eyes of their base. If they had any intention of actually INFORMING the public, they would never have created FOX, which lies on everything except the sports scores.


Can you not calmly discuss the value of free speech in universities without all the angry ranting about the Kluxers, Nazis, Bush, Fox and the rest??

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
193
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
191
Views

Re: Free Speech

191 Views
Message 15 of 101

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

 


My post stands and there is no "yeah me too" in it. Everything I posted is true, sometime that is confusing to trump supporters.


You really should try to get yourself unwrapped from that "Trump supporters" nonsense.

You're right ............ there is a "lot of nonsense" about trump supporters.

 

Presidents come and Presidents go but basic core political beliefs remain constant in the individual.

Yep, so do racism, bigotry, dishonesty, and denial.

Correction - in the thinking individual.

A "thinking individual" doesn't hold onto such things and would not have supported trump in the first place.

Those ruled by blind hatred and the need to "belong to the Klatch" apparently are more flexible.

Funny, but those in the trump "klatch" sure don't seem to be "flexible" to me, flexibility would enable them to criticize trump at some point, yet they don't.

 

Still can't get away from Trump can you?

 

The issue is college kids being exposed to the entire spectrum of political ideology and making their own decisions - as opposed to have their exposure dictated by biased administrators and mobs.


 

 

 


 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
191
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
187
Views

Re: Free Speech

187 Views
Message 16 of 101

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@williamb39198 wrote:

@Olderscout66

For sure. Things have changed and not for the good. And it’s not about hate, it’s about seeking the truth. 

 

@rk9152

So much for a wish of courtesy. But, I do agree with you. With trump, his base, trump supporters, trump repubs, freedom caucus, racists, supremists, and ultra right conservatives...things have sunk to an all time new low! Terrible behavior!

 

Never Forget


I'm not sure of your point. Can you point to left wing speakers disinvited over the threat of violence, shouted down, or stopped by mob violence?


Left wing speakers don't promote bigotry, white supremacy, separatism, bash those with different sexual preferences, denigrate those of certain religions, discriminate against women, promote violence by showing up wearing helmets, carrying shields and displaying weapons. That's why they haven't been "dis-invited".


Condoleezza Rice didn't speak at Rutgers because of student protests. Which of your claims above apply to her.

 

John Cornyn"s invitation to speak at TSU was rescinded due to student protests. Is he one of your made up list above?

 

Now, back to the basic question I asked -  Can you point to left wing speakers disinvited over the threat of violence, shouted down, or stopped by mob violence?


Evidently you didn't read this, it answers your question:  

 

Left wing speakers don't promote bigotry, white supremacy, separatism, bash those with different sexual preferences, denigrate those of certain religions, discriminate against women, promote violence by showing up wearing helmets, carrying shields and displaying weapons. That's why they haven't been "dis-invited".


Yep, so snoopy said - another "Yeah, me too". I'll give you the same type answer - what violence does Ann Coulter push? What helmet have you seen on John Cornyn? Which women did Condi Rice discriminate against?


You asked me why left wing speakers weren't "dis-invited" and I gave you the reasons. Ann Coulter, John Cornyn and Condi Rice have nothing to do with my answer.


You claimed it was related to bigotry and the rest of the stew. Yet those I mentioned were dropped - are they bigots.

 

As to why lefties are not dropped - they speak the language of the average university. So, any objections are not acted on. Plus, we on the right respect free speech and want to see all sides offered to students so they can grow and make their own decisions. So, we do not don masks and smash property to stop a speaker.


I said nothing about why those were "dis-invited", and I don't care why they were  because it is a University's right to "dis-invite" who they please.

 

But ................. you asked me to point to left wing speakers "dis-invited  " over the threat of violence, shouted down, or stopped by mob violence ".  

 

I stated:  "Left wing speakers don't promote bigotry, white supremacy, separatism, bash those with different sexual preferences, denigrate those of certain religions, discriminate against women, promote violence by showing up wearing helmets, carrying shields and displaying weapons. That's why they haven't been "dis-invited".  (you see, this is why students don't protest them speaking at their schools)


You have labeled me alt-right. Should that (labeling not reality) prevent me from addressing students? 

 

And in response to the silliness above - what invited speaker showed up in a helmet?

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
187
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
189
Views

Re: Free Speech

189 Views
Message 17 of 101

Once again Republicans are trying to pervert the law for their nazi ends.

FREE SPEECH in THIS country means THE GOVERNMENT cannot censur speech.

 

- that's how we discovered the War in Vietnam was a politically motivated disaster from day one and nobody in positions of power believed we had even the remotest chance of "winning". It's how we learned about Watergate being a HUGE Republican perversion of Justice and how we learned jrbush LIED us into Iraq and Afghanistan with no intention of "winning".

 

Says NOTHING about the private sector determining who gets to speak or write in THEIR venues.

 

Republicans want it to mean they can hire Nazis, KKK and White Supremacists to forment riots on College Campuses to rev up their lofo base and give higher education a "bad name" in the eyes of their base. If they had any intention of actually INFORMING the public, they would never have created FOX, which lies on everything except the sports scores.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
189
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
170
Views

Re: Free Speech

170 Views
Message 18 of 101

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

 


My post stands and there is no "yeah me too" in it. Everything I posted is true, sometime that is confusing to trump supporters.


You really should try to get yourself unwrapped from that "Trump supporters" nonsense.

You're right ............ there is a "lot of nonsense" about trump supporters.

 

Presidents come and Presidents go but basic core political beliefs remain constant in the individual.

Yep, so do racism, bigotry, dishonesty, and denial.

Correction - in the thinking individual.

A "thinking individual" doesn't hold onto such things and would not have supported trump in the first place.

Those ruled by blind hatred and the need to "belong to the Klatch" apparently are more flexible.

Funny, but those in the trump "klatch" sure don't seem to be "flexible" to me, flexibility would enable them to criticize trump at some point, yet they don't.

 

 


 

 

 


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
170
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
165
Views

Re: Free Speech

165 Views
Message 19 of 101

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@williamb39198 wrote:

@Olderscout66

For sure. Things have changed and not for the good. And it’s not about hate, it’s about seeking the truth. 

 

@rk9152

So much for a wish of courtesy. But, I do agree with you. With trump, his base, trump supporters, trump repubs, freedom caucus, racists, supremists, and ultra right conservatives...things have sunk to an all time new low! Terrible behavior!

 

Never Forget


I'm not sure of your point. Can you point to left wing speakers disinvited over the threat of violence, shouted down, or stopped by mob violence?


Left wing speakers don't promote bigotry, white supremacy, separatism, bash those with different sexual preferences, denigrate those of certain religions, discriminate against women, promote violence by showing up wearing helmets, carrying shields and displaying weapons. That's why they haven't been "dis-invited".


Condoleezza Rice didn't speak at Rutgers because of student protests. Which of your claims above apply to her.

 

John Cornyn"s invitation to speak at TSU was rescinded due to student protests. Is he one of your made up list above?

 

Now, back to the basic question I asked -  Can you point to left wing speakers disinvited over the threat of violence, shouted down, or stopped by mob violence?


Evidently you didn't read this, it answers your question:  

 

Left wing speakers don't promote bigotry, white supremacy, separatism, bash those with different sexual preferences, denigrate those of certain religions, discriminate against women, promote violence by showing up wearing helmets, carrying shields and displaying weapons. That's why they haven't been "dis-invited".


Yep, so snoopy said - another "Yeah, me too". I'll give you the same type answer - what violence does Ann Coulter push? What helmet have you seen on John Cornyn? Which women did Condi Rice discriminate against?


You asked me why left wing speakers weren't "dis-invited" and I gave you the reasons. Ann Coulter, John Cornyn and Condi Rice have nothing to do with my answer.


You claimed it was related to bigotry and the rest of the stew. Yet those I mentioned were dropped - are they bigots.

 

As to why lefties are not dropped - they speak the language of the average university. So, any objections are not acted on. Plus, we on the right respect free speech and want to see all sides offered to students so they can grow and make their own decisions. So, we do not don masks and smash property to stop a speaker.


I said nothing about why those were "dis-invited", and I don't care why they were  because it is a University's right to "dis-invite" who they please.

 

But ................. you asked me to point to left wing speakers "dis-invited  " over the threat of violence, shouted down, or stopped by mob violence ".  

 

I stated:  "Left wing speakers don't promote bigotry, white supremacy, separatism, bash those with different sexual preferences, denigrate those of certain religions, discriminate against women, promote violence by showing up wearing helmets, carrying shields and displaying weapons. That's why they haven't been "dis-invited".  (you see, this is why students don't protest them speaking at their schools)


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
165
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
163
Views

Re: Free Speech

163 Views
Message 20 of 101

@gruffstuff wrote:

The Ann Coulter comment is approval of speech suppression.

 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

Can you or I suppress speech on our property or in our business ?

 

Absolutely.

 

Colleges can and should seek a balance between speech and protest that serves the best interest of the college.

 

If the KKK Kollege wants to invite Richard Spencer to speak they should be able to do that.

 

If Berkley tells Richard Spencer he can't speak there, that is a good thing.

 

The Richard Spencers and Ann Coulters of the world can go speak all they want on the Internet,  UTube, or FaceBook.

 

They have freedom of speech, just not on private property that tells them they don't.

 

 


There is no question but that they have the right to invite or not invite any speaker - even disinvite speakers. But the point was the deterioration of conditions on the campus when there can be speakers stopped because of the threat of violence from those who want to suppress his thoughts.

 

I personally prefer to let all sides be heard and student make up their own mind. That should be part of the university intellectual growth approach.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
163
Views