World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[MrPopo]

So the protestors lobbied Congress to try and pass a law forbidding him from saying certain things?

[BogusMeatFactory]

It is also as important to remember that "freedom of speech and association" is a two-way street. As much as I would defend a hateful bigot's right to speak his mind free of consequence, I would defend a university decision - and even a decision by a public university - not to associate itself with that person's speech by providing him with a forum to express his views. (That is, a hateful bigot is free to yell from the streets, but he is not entitled to a an auditorium.)

Okay now you are swarming, get away from being drawn as a moth into the one sided lamp.

And now you are falling off a cliff, so stop being a lemming.

[Sarge]

Is this where I chime in and tell everyone to play nice or I take all their video games away?

(I secretly don't care that much, but I will happily take your video games.)

[prfsnl_gmr]

Okay now you are swarming, get away from being drawn as a moth into the one sided lamp. The university did invite him. The protesters denied the Free Speech which is the big issue. This has happened in New York and a few other locations as well.

No. Every single protestor has just as much of a right to speak his or her mind. Just as he is within his rights to be a hateful bigot, they are within their rights to call him out and request that anyone providing him with a forum to air his hateful views not do so. Absent some sort of contractual requirements, the institutions that offered him a forum are free to withdraw it and disassociate themselves from him. He is still just as free as everyone else to stand on the street and yell. His "rights" have not been infringed in any way.

That is the inconvenient thing about freedom speech. Everyone has it!

(Personally, I don't think that protests are the most effective response to that sort of speech, and I do agree that the exchange of ideas on college campuses is currently under threat to a certain extent. My thoughts on those subjects do not alter my conclusions regarding the bigot's rights, however.)

....Sarge...there is no right to awesome video games. They are a privilege!

[Sarge]

Video games should be a human right! We should give free video games to everyone!

[CRTGAMER]

What? Nobody brave enough to comment on the racial issue and challenge of Senator Warren? Senator O'Conell did right and flat out tore up that racial card. Many would not do that for fear being called racist. Welcome the removal of "Political Right" values and finally getting back to reality, the senator may take her seat.

Elizabeth Warren rebuked on Senate floor - http://www.racketboy.com/forum/viewtopi ... 4#p1082354

Video games should be a human right! We should give free video games to everyone!

I see the hidden message that you have done there.

No. Every single protestor has just as much of a right to speak his or her mind. Just as he is within his rights to be a hateful bigot, they are within their rights to call him out and request that anyone providing him with a forum to air his hateful views not do so. Absent some sort of contractual requirements, the institutions that offered him a forum are free to withdraw it and disassociate themselves from him. He is still just as free as everyone else to stand on the street and yell. His "rights" have not been infringed in any way.

That is the inconvenient thing about freedom speech. Everyone has it!

(Personally, I don't think that protests are the most effective response to that sort of speech, and I do agree that the exchange of ideas on college campuses is currently under threat to a certain extent. My thoughts on those subjects do not alter my conclusions regarding the bigot's rights, however.)

Agree, Everyone should have free speech as long as it does not impend on the free speech of others. That includes the free speech rights of the idiots blocking the airport, not to impede my rights of making my connecting flight!

Yes, the protesters have a right to free speech, but not destruction. They did not have to attend the speaking event and had no right to prevent the free speech of a person they hate thru violence. What of the students that did want to hear the free speech thru the official engagement, that was shut down by the others? The irony was the school invited someone so controversial just to prod a diversity in the name of free speech. THE SPEECH DID NOT TAKE PLACE, with no indication what would have been spoken in a formal setting. Another example of prejudging and not allowing all information. In this case staff and students in the protest denied the free speech by their choosing denying the rights of others. Their action has jeopardized a section of free speech from future invitations that just they detest. The so called free speech allowed not as diverse. Doing the protest violently without repercussions just encourages future violence.

This is why I have changed my mind on the Education Secretary. The whole school system in California has to be turned around to restore education, respect and order. I do not want money going to private schools that teach religion, but we do need solid education. The choice puts pressure on schools to clean their own house. Though the choice should prioritize by who lives in a location if they desire versus getting bumped aside.

[jp1]

CRT, please shut up. I mean, I support your right to free speech so I will never report you to a moderator...but, I'm asking nicely that you stop being so foolish. One thing I'm certain of, is that you would never take issue with this post since you support free speech. Even further you support "Free Speech" the individual named after the constitutional right.

I'd love to see the removal of "Political Right" values. I'm very surprised to hear you say that though. I see you've finally realized that Trump isn't a conservative at all, but instead a dictator that doesn't even qualify for status under our political system. Congratulations. It's about time you stopped being "drawn as a moth into the one sided lamp".

Perhaps now that all those issues are put to rest some discussion could happen here rather than you just randomly vomiting your views while completely ignoring every opposing viewpoint.

[prfsnl_gmr]

What? No comments on the administration's defeat at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals? I read the opinion yesterday, and it is very well-reasoned. It doesn't touch on the religious discrimination issues, and it is largely focused on Fifth Amendment analysis. It is also the harbinger of defeat throughout the remainder of the case.

It is nice to see the Court clip Trump's wings a bit, but I am certain that there are still ways that he can achieve his horrible goals legally. He just won't be able to do by proceeding in such a ham-fisted manner.

[jp1]

What? No comments on the administration's defeat at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals? I read the opinion yesterday, and it is very well-reasoned. It doesn't touch on the religious discrimination issues, and it is largely focused on Fifth Amendment analysis. It is also the harbinger of defeat throughout the remainder of the case.

It is nice to see the Court clip Trump's wings a bit, but I am certain that there are still ways that he can achieve his horrible goals legally. He just won't be able to do by proceeding in such a ham-fisted manner.

In that case, he just won't be able to do it. You extend the man a little too much credit on the intellectual end. He is a spoiled child with a lot of money, that's the only reason he ever accomplishes anything.

[Ack]

What? No comments on the administration's defeat at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals? I read the opinion yesterday, and it is very well-reasoned. It doesn't touch on the religious discrimination issues, and it is largely focused on Fifth Amendment analysis. It is also the harbinger of defeat throughout the remainder of the case.

It is nice to see the Court clip Trump's wings a bit, but I am certain that there are still ways that he can achieve his horrible goals legally. He just won't be able to do by proceeding in such a ham-fisted manner.

In that case, he just won't be able to do it. You extend the man a little too much credit on the intellectual end. He is a spoiled child with a lot of money, that's the only reason he ever accomplishes anything.

Yes, he is, but I think you underestimate his advisory team. Steve Bannon in particular is both highly intelligent and extremely manipulative. The travel ban always seemed more his MO than Trump's. If he cannot do things this way, then he will change tactics but come back again.