|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On March 04 2017 05:09 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:02 Plansix wrote:On March 04 2017 05:00 Danglars wrote:On March 04 2017 04:37 Gahlo wrote:On March 04 2017 04:09 Danglars wrote:MIDDLEBURY, Vt. — Hundreds of college students on Thursday protested a lecture by a writer some called a white nationalist, forcing the college to move his talk to an undisclosed campus location from which it was live-streamed to the original venue but couldn’t be heard above protesters’ chants, feet stamping and occasional smoke alarms.
Speaker Charles Murray wrote “The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life” and “Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010.” The Southern Poverty Law Center considers him a white nationalist who uses “racist pseudoscience and misleading statistics to argue that social inequality is caused by the genetic inferiority of the black and Latino communities, women and the poor.”
Murray hasn’t responded to an email seeking comment.
Middlebury College students turned their backs on Murray just as he started to speak Thursday and chanted “Who is the enemy? White supremacy!” ‘’Racist, sexist, anti-gay, Charles Murray, go away!” and “Your message is hatred. We cannot tolerate it.”
They continued their chants until the college announced that Murray would speak from another location on campus. Students continued their protests, drowning out the talk. WaPoNow they're trying to give Charles Murray the Milo treatment. He's a controversial AEI scholar, which of course means he shouldn't be allowed to speak when invited to address college students that want to hear him. Administrators at Middlebury, like Berkeley, unable to protect free speech on campus. So very sad. I dunno, it seems like he brought it on himself by being a turdwaffle. Freedom of speech doesn't mean there isn't consequences for your words. The consequences for your words is apparently not being allowed to speak them to people who want to hear them on university campuses that receive public funding. The longer term consequences is people confuse protest with shutting down speech. Protest what they're saying with signs and marches if you want, just let them speak in forums anyways. It's the ground floor of protecting the civil society. Hearing the other side out instead of shouting them down. Back in the day it wasn't controversial. He was allowed to speak, so I fail to see how this is a problem. When they said "drowning out the talk" they meant the protest's loud ruckus and lack of administration meant even the broadcast from a separate location was unheard. Given that it went unheard by those in attendance, would you admit to a problem on free speech grounds, a problem also with administration/campus police not protecting free expression on campus? Granted I'm not holding my breath on this one.
So basically administration/campus police should crack down on protests in the name of freedom of expression.
|
On March 04 2017 05:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic.
The constitution disagrees with you unfortunately. The first amendment protects peoples right to free speech and that doesn't end where people disagree with them. You can protest them but you can't violate their civil rights.
|
Suggesting that the protesters have a right to shut down the speaking engagements of others on the grounds that the protesters have First Amendment rights, too, belies an infantile understanding of the Constitution and political discourse.
|
On March 04 2017 05:14 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic. "Go shout them down" is such a pathetic understanding of the first amendment, I seriously doubt you understand speech that needs protecting. Our framers tried to be clear on this, but activists have twisted free speech to only apply to certain agreeable forms of speech. Sad day.
I seriously doubt you have any idea what you're talking about, so here we are then. Doesn't seem like you understand what free speech is at all. Protesting and shouting pathetic people down is protected. I'm not the government. I'm not coming to take your right away. You appear to be under the false assumption that free speech means you can say whatever you want with no consequences, chiming in, or protesting from your fellow citizens. You couldn't be more wrong.
|
On March 04 2017 05:16 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic. The constitution disagrees with you unfortunately. The first amendment protects peoples right to free speech and that doesn't end where people disagree with them. You can protest them but you can't violate their civil rights.
The constitution protects your right to say stuff and not be arrested for it by the government, it doesn't protect you from members of the community not agreeing with you and protesting you while trying to get you to leave.
Anyway the government has become a cold war between dems and republicans -_- what the congressional republicans did while Obama was in office was basically escalate the conflict and now the shoe is on the other foot and Dems are playing the same game.
|
On March 04 2017 05:16 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic. The constitution disagrees with you unfortunately. The first amendment protects peoples right to free speech and that doesn't end where people disagree with them. You can protest them but you can't violate their civil rights.
Who said anything about violating civil rights? Protesting awful people violates nothing. You've created some sort of civil rights violation strawman.
|
On March 04 2017 05:20 OuchyDathurts wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:16 Sermokala wrote:On March 04 2017 05:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic. The constitution disagrees with you unfortunately. The first amendment protects peoples right to free speech and that doesn't end where people disagree with them. You can protest them but you can't violate their civil rights. Who said anything about violating civil rights? Protesting awful people violates nothing. You've created some sort of civil rights violation strawman.
No I created a clear civil rights argument beacuse you think protesting what you think are "awful people" is somehow okay despite useing the same exact rational that the people you are against use to protest gays, blacks, and jews. I'm pretty sure the WBC protests because they think gay people are "awful people" and have successful sued on first amendment rights to people stoping them from protesting.
On March 04 2017 05:20 Slaughter wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:16 Sermokala wrote:On March 04 2017 05:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic. The constitution disagrees with you unfortunately. The first amendment protects peoples right to free speech and that doesn't end where people disagree with them. You can protest them but you can't violate their civil rights. The constitution protects your right to say stuff and not be arrested for it by the government, it doesn't protect you from members of the community not agreeing with you and protesting you while trying to get you to leave. Anyway the government has become a cold war between dems and republicans -_- what the congressional republicans did while Obama was in office was basically escalate the conflict and now the shoe is on the other foot and Dems are playing the same game.
The point is that they arn't being allowed to say stuff and the protesters are refusing to allow them to say stuff. You can't punish someone for doing something if they are prevented from doing it.
|
You are allowed to speech at the street corner or any public venue. If you are loud enough for everyone to hear you is your problem. If conservative students want to shouts and scream the next speaker that talks about diversity or civil rights, I have no problem with them doing it.
We need stop trying to push each other off the moral high ground and accept that civil discourse requires some personal reasonability. I’m more than happy to tell progressive to tone it down once conservatives start saying Milo is a bad look for them. I used to be the guy who defended Milo’s right to speak, but I got tired of trying to justify him. Find a better person for me to stick up for and I’ll happily go back to defending their right to speak.
|
On March 04 2017 05:20 OuchyDathurts wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:16 Sermokala wrote:On March 04 2017 05:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic. The constitution disagrees with you unfortunately. The first amendment protects peoples right to free speech and that doesn't end where people disagree with them. You can protest them but you can't violate their civil rights. Who said anything about violating civil rights? Protesting awful people violates nothing. You've created some sort of civil rights violation strawman.
Your posts on this matter are outrageous. Go watch the videos of the riots in Berkeley when Milo showed up and tell us with a straight face that that the protesters' behavior was constitutionally protected. Here's the bottom line. You don't like what Milo has to say. You would rather live in a world where Milo does not get to say what he wants to say. And because of that, you are in favor of governmental authorities withholding the types of protections that would afford Milo the opportunity to say what he wants to say, just like Berkeley did. This sort of fascism-lite is pervasive throughout the left. At least have the courage to own it rather than hide behind some bullshit argument about how the protesters have constitutional rights, too.
|
On March 04 2017 05:29 Plansix wrote:
You are allowed to speech at the street corner or any public venue. If you are loud enough for everyone to hear you is your problem. If conservative students want to shouts and scream the next speaker that talks about diversity or civil rights, I have no problem with them doing it.
We need stop trying to push each other off the moral high ground and accept that civil discourse requires some personal reasonability. I’m more than happy to tell progressive to tone it down once conservatives start saying Milo is a bad look for them. I used to be the guy who defended Milo’s right to speak, but I got tired of trying to justify him. Find a better person for me to stick up for and I’ll happily go back to defending their right to speak.
You're doing the same thing the others are doing. You are clearly advocating that they are not allowed to speech at the street corner or any public venue. You are clearly stating that they should be pushed off and shouted down at the street corner or any public venue.
You can argue for or against what Milo said and did but you have to do that after hes allowed to say and do things.
|
The sad world where the Milo can no longer out trans students and call people stupid on national TV because no one values him enough to put up with the protests his bile brings with him.
|
On March 04 2017 05:32 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:29 Plansix wrote:
You are allowed to speech at the street corner or any public venue. If you are loud enough for everyone to hear you is your problem. If conservative students want to shouts and scream the next speaker that talks about diversity or civil rights, I have no problem with them doing it.
We need stop trying to push each other off the moral high ground and accept that civil discourse requires some personal reasonability. I’m more than happy to tell progressive to tone it down once conservatives start saying Milo is a bad look for them. I used to be the guy who defended Milo’s right to speak, but I got tired of trying to justify him. Find a better person for me to stick up for and I’ll happily go back to defending their right to speak.
You're doing the same thing the others are doing. You are clearly advocating that they are not allowed to speech at the street corner or any public venue. You are clearly stating that they should be pushed off and shouted down at the street corner or any public venue. You can argue for or against what Milo said and did but you have to do that after hes allowed to say and do things.
I never said anything about pushing. Just make sure you can shout louder than the person who sets their soap box up across the street.
|
On March 04 2017 05:29 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:20 OuchyDathurts wrote:On March 04 2017 05:16 Sermokala wrote:On March 04 2017 05:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic. The constitution disagrees with you unfortunately. The first amendment protects peoples right to free speech and that doesn't end where people disagree with them. You can protest them but you can't violate their civil rights. Who said anything about violating civil rights? Protesting awful people violates nothing. You've created some sort of civil rights violation strawman. No I created a clear civil rights argument beacuse you think protesting what you think are "awful people" is somehow okay despite useing the same exact rational that the people you are against use to protest gays, blacks, and jews. I'm pretty sure the WBC protests because they think gay people are "awful people" and have successful sued on first amendment rights to people stoping them from protesting.
Protesting is first amendment protected free speech. Going to a funeral the Westboro Baptist Church is picketing and blocking them and shouting them down is a fabulous thing and completely protected under the constitution. You can not like being yelled at for having bad ideas but there's absolutely zero civil rights violations happening there at all, no matter how much you'd like there to be. You get to have your bad ideas and I get to tell you your ideas are bad, end of.
There's also some incredible irony that Milo fans called other public people pussies for backing out of public speaking because they were getting shouty backlash but when he does it its somehow different. Really quite cute actually, but I don't want to derail the thread since that particular topic seems to be a black hole that no thread recovers from on TL.
|
On March 04 2017 04:09 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +MIDDLEBURY, Vt. — Hundreds of college students on Thursday protested a lecture by a writer some called a white nationalist, forcing the college to move his talk to an undisclosed campus location from which it was live-streamed to the original venue but couldn’t be heard above protesters’ chants, feet stamping and occasional smoke alarms.
Speaker Charles Murray wrote “The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life” and “Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010.” The Southern Poverty Law Center considers him a white nationalist who uses “racist pseudoscience and misleading statistics to argue that social inequality is caused by the genetic inferiority of the black and Latino communities, women and the poor.”
Murray hasn’t responded to an email seeking comment.
Middlebury College students turned their backs on Murray just as he started to speak Thursday and chanted “Who is the enemy? White supremacy!” ‘’Racist, sexist, anti-gay, Charles Murray, go away!” and “Your message is hatred. We cannot tolerate it.”
They continued their chants until the college announced that Murray would speak from another location on campus. Students continued their protests, drowning out the talk. WaPoNow they're trying to give Charles Murray the Milo treatment. He's a controversial AEI scholar, which of course means he shouldn't be allowed to speak when invited to address college students that want to hear him. Administrators at Middlebury, like Berkeley, unable to protect free speech on campus. So very sad.
I reread this article a couple times and I don't see how admins at Middlebury failed to protect free speech.
From what I gather, it boils down to this:
1. Charles Murray is a white nationalist (I want to write racist here but I'll remain consistent with the writing from article) and he wanted to share his views at a VT university
2a. Student protesters don't want his ideology spread at their school.
2b. Student protesters become disruptive enough where Murray has to change locations to deliver his talk
3. Middlebury fulfilled their "obligation" (for a lack of a better word) to allow Murray to speak at a non-disclosed location on campus and recorded his talk for students who wanted to hear it later
It seems to me that the university indeed allowed Murray to speak and share his ideas on campus and recorded it for Murray's/the club that invited Murray to use/reproduce/etc.
In the end, no party outright prevented Murray from speaking but only what, inconvenienced (?) him from speaking at his original location. So are you discontent that student protesters forced him to change venues at best?
|
On March 04 2017 05:14 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic. "Go shout them down" is such a pathetic understanding of the first amendment, I seriously doubt you understand speech that needs protecting. Our framers tried to be clear on this, but activists have twisted free speech to only apply to certain agreeable forms of speech. Sad day.
this, in context, is an outrageous hypocrisy. you can disagree with what the protestors are doing and i would fully expect you to, and frankly while i disagree with the speakers 'rhetoric' i also find the protesting in a less than flattering position here. but this statement is a bold, bold hypocrisy.
|
On March 04 2017 05:39 OuchyDathurts wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:29 Sermokala wrote:On March 04 2017 05:20 OuchyDathurts wrote:On March 04 2017 05:16 Sermokala wrote:On March 04 2017 05:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic. The constitution disagrees with you unfortunately. The first amendment protects peoples right to free speech and that doesn't end where people disagree with them. You can protest them but you can't violate their civil rights. Who said anything about violating civil rights? Protesting awful people violates nothing. You've created some sort of civil rights violation strawman. No I created a clear civil rights argument beacuse you think protesting what you think are "awful people" is somehow okay despite useing the same exact rational that the people you are against use to protest gays, blacks, and jews. I'm pretty sure the WBC protests because they think gay people are "awful people" and have successful sued on first amendment rights to people stoping them from protesting. Protesting is first amendment protected free speech. Going to a funeral the Westboro Baptist Church is picketing and blocking them and shouting them down is a fabulous thing and completely protected under the constitution. You can not like being yelled at for having bad ideas but there's absolutely zero civil rights violations happening there at all, no matter how much you'd like there to be. You get to have your bad ideas and I get to tell you your ideas are bad, end of. There's also some incredible irony that Milo fans called other public people pussies for backing out of public speaking because they were getting shouty backlash but when he does it its somehow different. Really quite cute actually, but I don't want to derail the thread since that particular topic seems to be a black hole that no thread recovers from on TL.
You can't violate other peoples constitutional rights in exercise of your own. It doesn't matter what your opinon is on peoples use of their right to free speech (clearly you missed taht you are useing the same logic as the KKK and WBC but oh well) you have to allow them to exercise it.
Don't start with some "I'm going to talk about stuff but you're not allowed to" at the end of your post. It just makes you look really dumb. There is no black hole that no one recoveres from in this thread. We got out of obamacare even if it took us 2k pages to do it.
|
On March 04 2017 05:40 brian wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:14 Danglars wrote:On March 04 2017 05:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic. "Go shout them down" is such a pathetic understanding of the first amendment, I seriously doubt you understand speech that needs protecting. Our framers tried to be clear on this, but activists have twisted free speech to only apply to certain agreeable forms of speech. Sad day. this, in context, is an outrageous hypocrisy. you can disagree with what the protestors are doing and i would fully expect you to, and frankly while i disagree with the speakers 'rhetoric' i also find the protesting in a less than flattering position here. but this statement is a bold, bold hypocrisy.
Xdaunt has always had a very amusing understanding from the founding fathers. These are guys who talked so much shit in both public and in writings that they dueled and killed each other over it. That spoke on street corners and freely admitted that their ideas might get them shot. Now people want to be like the framers and speak truth to power, but even the mildest hint of risk or opposition and they run to the moral high ground to call everyone fascists.
|
On March 04 2017 05:43 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:39 OuchyDathurts wrote:On March 04 2017 05:29 Sermokala wrote:On March 04 2017 05:20 OuchyDathurts wrote:On March 04 2017 05:16 Sermokala wrote:On March 04 2017 05:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic. The constitution disagrees with you unfortunately. The first amendment protects peoples right to free speech and that doesn't end where people disagree with them. You can protest them but you can't violate their civil rights. Who said anything about violating civil rights? Protesting awful people violates nothing. You've created some sort of civil rights violation strawman. No I created a clear civil rights argument beacuse you think protesting what you think are "awful people" is somehow okay despite useing the same exact rational that the people you are against use to protest gays, blacks, and jews. I'm pretty sure the WBC protests because they think gay people are "awful people" and have successful sued on first amendment rights to people stoping them from protesting. Protesting is first amendment protected free speech. Going to a funeral the Westboro Baptist Church is picketing and blocking them and shouting them down is a fabulous thing and completely protected under the constitution. You can not like being yelled at for having bad ideas but there's absolutely zero civil rights violations happening there at all, no matter how much you'd like there to be. You get to have your bad ideas and I get to tell you your ideas are bad, end of. There's also some incredible irony that Milo fans called other public people pussies for backing out of public speaking because they were getting shouty backlash but when he does it its somehow different. Really quite cute actually, but I don't want to derail the thread since that particular topic seems to be a black hole that no thread recovers from on TL. You can't violate other peoples constitutional rights in exercise of your own. It doesn't matter what your opinon is on peoples use of their right to free speech (clearly you missed taht you are useing the same logic as the KKK and WBC but oh well) you have to allow them to exercise it. Don't start with some "I'm going to talk about stuff but you're not allowed to" at the end of your post. It just makes you look really dumb. There is no black hole that no one recoveres from in this thread. We got out of obamacare even if it took us 2k pages to do it.
How are you not allowed to talk about stuff? I haven't shot you or kidnapped you.
Tell me which civil right I'm violating and exactly how I'm violating it protesting you.
And yes, there are topics on TL that end up with the thread shut down every single time. Certain topics people can't handle. Not talking about free speech in general with this statement, but a specific incident.
|
On March 04 2017 05:43 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:39 OuchyDathurts wrote:On March 04 2017 05:29 Sermokala wrote:On March 04 2017 05:20 OuchyDathurts wrote:On March 04 2017 05:16 Sermokala wrote:On March 04 2017 05:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic. The constitution disagrees with you unfortunately. The first amendment protects peoples right to free speech and that doesn't end where people disagree with them. You can protest them but you can't violate their civil rights. Who said anything about violating civil rights? Protesting awful people violates nothing. You've created some sort of civil rights violation strawman. No I created a clear civil rights argument beacuse you think protesting what you think are "awful people" is somehow okay despite useing the same exact rational that the people you are against use to protest gays, blacks, and jews. I'm pretty sure the WBC protests because they think gay people are "awful people" and have successful sued on first amendment rights to people stoping them from protesting. Protesting is first amendment protected free speech. Going to a funeral the Westboro Baptist Church is picketing and blocking them and shouting them down is a fabulous thing and completely protected under the constitution. You can not like being yelled at for having bad ideas but there's absolutely zero civil rights violations happening there at all, no matter how much you'd like there to be. You get to have your bad ideas and I get to tell you your ideas are bad, end of. There's also some incredible irony that Milo fans called other public people pussies for backing out of public speaking because they were getting shouty backlash but when he does it its somehow different. Really quite cute actually, but I don't want to derail the thread since that particular topic seems to be a black hole that no thread recovers from on TL. You can't violate other peoples constitutional rights in exercise of your own. It doesn't matter what your opinon is on peoples use of their right to free speech (clearly you missed taht you are useing the same logic as the KKK and WBC but oh well) you have to allow them to exercise it. Don't start with some "I'm going to talk about stuff but you're not allowed to" at the end of your post. It just makes you look really dumb. There is no black hole that no one recoveres from in this thread. We got out of obamacare even if it took us 2k pages to do it.
The Constitution is a guarantee from the government to its citizens, not citizens with each other.
|
On March 04 2017 05:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2017 05:43 Sermokala wrote:On March 04 2017 05:39 OuchyDathurts wrote:On March 04 2017 05:29 Sermokala wrote:On March 04 2017 05:20 OuchyDathurts wrote:On March 04 2017 05:16 Sermokala wrote:On March 04 2017 05:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:
Can we not sully the name of punk by comparing it to conservatism, the least punk thing in the known universe?
People should protest the shit out of Milo. They should protest the shit out of the alt right, the KKK, neo-nazis, the WBC, anyone with abhorrent beliefs. Go shout them down and show them they're weak and pathetic. That's your first amendment in action. People do, and should protest awful people who hate monger, there's zero wrong with that, it's actually fantastic. The constitution disagrees with you unfortunately. The first amendment protects peoples right to free speech and that doesn't end where people disagree with them. You can protest them but you can't violate their civil rights. Who said anything about violating civil rights? Protesting awful people violates nothing. You've created some sort of civil rights violation strawman. No I created a clear civil rights argument beacuse you think protesting what you think are "awful people" is somehow okay despite useing the same exact rational that the people you are against use to protest gays, blacks, and jews. I'm pretty sure the WBC protests because they think gay people are "awful people" and have successful sued on first amendment rights to people stoping them from protesting. Protesting is first amendment protected free speech. Going to a funeral the Westboro Baptist Church is picketing and blocking them and shouting them down is a fabulous thing and completely protected under the constitution. You can not like being yelled at for having bad ideas but there's absolutely zero civil rights violations happening there at all, no matter how much you'd like there to be. You get to have your bad ideas and I get to tell you your ideas are bad, end of. There's also some incredible irony that Milo fans called other public people pussies for backing out of public speaking because they were getting shouty backlash but when he does it its somehow different. Really quite cute actually, but I don't want to derail the thread since that particular topic seems to be a black hole that no thread recovers from on TL. You can't violate other peoples constitutional rights in exercise of your own. It doesn't matter what your opinon is on peoples use of their right to free speech (clearly you missed taht you are useing the same logic as the KKK and WBC but oh well) you have to allow them to exercise it. Don't start with some "I'm going to talk about stuff but you're not allowed to" at the end of your post. It just makes you look really dumb. There is no black hole that no one recoveres from in this thread. We got out of obamacare even if it took us 2k pages to do it. The Constitution is a guarantee from the government to its citizens, not citizens with each other.
I feel like this point is often overlooked when people bring up free speech rights.
Edit: So Middlebury College is a private university. So even if the university at an official capacity didn't want Murray to speak on their campus, I imagine no constitutional rights/laws are broken?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
