|
conservatives allegedly emphasize personal responsibility but get pissy when challenged for their views, news at eleven.
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 11:31 |
|
|
i actually joined a conservative group that is dedicated to fighting back against the liberal dominance of discourse on campus (because they have really good food). it is literally just a bunch of white people hand wringing about how no one agrees with their lovely ideas. if there was actual systemic oppression of conservative ideology, then good, gently caress these people ive seen actual people in their twenties wearing BOWTIES.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
well lets see in the first case black coworkers repeatedly told the janitor to stop, and he continued to bring the book to work, and the administration told him to stop and he kept doing it and got fired. say what you will about freedom of thought or whatever the gently caress but we live in an at will employment country, so firing an employee for repeatedly pissing off his coworkers and completely disregarding their feelings doesn't exactly feel like a terrible thing imo. it sounds like he was a stubborn dick about it. do you support employer's right to fire employees at will? second case; a poll. great, who gives a gently caress what a cohort of people who revel in feeling repressed subjectively feel. see, e.g., WAR ON CHRISTMAS, all the poo poo about this "no longer being a christian nation, whatever other bullshit about right wingers feeling oppressed. who cares what they feel, they're not. third one is the "indoctrination program", which here it is: http://d28htnjz2elwuj.cloudfront.net/pdfs/a2e5d0bcaeffab32138e77191c765347.pdf it honestly feels pretty benign to me, and if you're opposed to the sustainability poo poo, well the dorms are the ones footing the utilities bill so maybe encouraging students to consume less power is in their interest? anyway telling people things is not suppressing any ideas, and saying that they should present the "opposite" view is uh yeah just conservative handwringing. what's the opposing viewpoint of the sustainability poo poo? lying to them about accepted facts on climate change because it hurts conservatives' feelings? yeah get hosed. fourth case yeah that's hosed up but that's suppressing students opposing university graft and corruption, which isn't inherently ideological. corrupt university president tries to protect his own financial interests, winds up legally hosed for it, okay, good job, FIRE did something actually useful. but yeah taking the alarmist language of an advocacy group at face value is a good way to know the facts, and points to a lockstep conspiracy of suppression of a class of people. hey so what are your thoughts on systemic racial oppression in america, out of curiosity? does it exist
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
-Troika- posted:People who show up to drown out a speaker arn't there to exercise their right to free speech, they're there to impede someone else's. a cogent constitutional analysis
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
Skeesix posted:That joke is now roughly 20 years old. this is what suppressing speech looks like.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2014 08:40
|
|
|
considering that schools pay up to hundreds of thousands of dollars for high profile speakers, particularly at commencement, and this money is coming from tuition students should have a say in whether or not they want their money to go to loving monsters like phyllis schaffly. and no, theimmigrant, it is not different with state schools, because there is no first amendment right to pay people tens of thousands of dollars to spew bile. or to waste school resources to provide a stage for them to speak bile. this is not hard.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2014 20:09
|
|
|
TheImmigrant posted:What if they are speaking for free? that's covered in the waste resources part by providing them a venue. if, i dunno, george bush wants to come and just speak through a megaphone on the sidewalk i don't think any university will make an effort to stop him.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
fanged wang posted:it's simply impossible the creepy masturbatory obsession with asserting your moral superiority over other people due to the inherent glorious rightness of your thoughts and inherent violent wrongness of those who disagree with you may have the unintended or heck wholly intended effect of silencing perfectly benign and acceptable behavior and speech, imo literally politics everywhere
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
fanged wang posted:yeah anyone who disagrees with me is a violent racist piece of poo poo douche gently caress pice of fuckshit and i hope they die pretty much, yeah. fanged wang posted:there's actually a broad ideological spectrum between orthodox anime marxist and black person murdering rethuglican shitlord in my experience not really, it's actually binary.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
Patrick Spens posted:There is more to free speech than governmental censorship. actually, no there isn't. you are conflating free speech with some other, more bitchmade concept. least in the american sense, and we are discussing american universities so
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
Darkman Fanpage posted:What do they have for food? catering from the more expensive and meat filled local restaurants typically, as well as chick fil a (because of course). most of the other organizations have chain pizza or stale thai food. the difference is staggering.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
nazis were popular, for a time
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
420DD Butts posted:I cannot get over how awful that article is on the whole. It's a collection of anecdotes (sometimes overblown in how censorious they are) to support the idea that kids these days are brainless and hate freedom. The author may as well have replaced the entire article with an old man yelling at a cloud. welcome to british journalism
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
ha yeah conservatives never do that, qed
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2014 03:33
|
|
|
on the left posted:To get back to the subject of "Is free speech under attack", it's plainly obvious that it is. The front page of The Fire's website has a consistent stream of bullshit speech codes and abridgement of freedom of speech such as a speech code at University of Central Missouri that bans hateful rhetoric or a student expelled because of Facebook posts. hm "code of conduct: don't be an rear end in a top hat" and "student expelled for being a huge rear end in a top hat" yeah i don't care also loving lol at putting "professional standards" in scare quotes like protecting the right of assholes to be assholes is the only legal obligation universities have. what's EO? oh sorry didn't hear you *posts stupid libertarian poo poo* haha Homura and Sickle fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Nov 29, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
hmm yeah did the research and there is a definite grey line between what constitutes an overly broad speech code and what doesn't. part of that is because the most anti-student-speech-code controlling precedent at the appellate level was written by noted intellectually dishonest fartbag, then Judge Samuel Alito (Saxe v. State Coll. Area Sch. Dist., 240 F.3d 200 (3d Cir. 2001)) so the opinion is waffling and nonsensical to reach the opinion that he wants, sorta like his opinion in Hobby Lobby. other circuit courts have held that speech codes that say being a massive bellend are against the rules are fine, so at best this is a circuit split issue and not an area of settled law, as to where the line is drawn. speaking of intellectually dishonest, fuckin hell FIRE is worthless, they pick and choose so much to the point of utter uselessness. like why did they only reproduce 2 pages of a guide explaining the code, and not the code itself, or the entire guide Homura and Sickle fucked around with this message at 04:27 on Nov 29, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2014 04:24
|
|
|
okay but for real a lot of these speech codes that the folk here are handwringing about are about making female and minority students feel like they're not in a hostile environment. if the "view point" being challenged is the color of one's skin, their gender, or sexuality then nothing is lost at all by banning that kind of speech. why should the "rights" of white male assholes to be hostile to people not like them trump the needs of others to get an education without feeling like a worthless second class citizen? cue post saying IT'S NOT REALLY ABOUT THAT HURFF, yeah it is
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2014 09:36
|
|
|
this thread is slowly swaying me over to the side that all speech should be illegal.The Snark posted:Maybe it would be a good idea to encourage this reasonably free speech in more or less public venues, be they privately owned or otherwise. Additionally I suspect it would be good for these fora to be very careful about what is forbidden lest they create an echo chamber. isn't a privately owned entity denying people they think are fuckers exercising the speech rights of the owners? anyway, i don't think that CNN's value of giving equal weight to two sides, even if one side is blatantly lying, should become a national agenda.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
fanged wang posted:a survey of 9,000 campus staff members shows that less than 20% of them believe it's safe to hold unpopular views on campus and it is plainly obvious to anyone with a brain that they're all white supremacists and garbage people who should shut up well the view "pedophilia rules" would be unpopular to hold, should people feel safe to hold that view? it is a retarded way to frame a survey question innit
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2014 11:36
|
|
|
fanged wang posted:hmmmm yes that probably is what they were thinking when they were asked to think of unpopular views that may not be welcome at a college campus, they were thinking about a hypothetical scenario involving pro pedophilia guest speakers just like any reasonable person would if you were to ask them that question. prolly were professors are pretty gross dude edit: seriously though just saying "unpopular view" leaves it up to the imagination of the survey filler to think of whatever poo poo is horrible in their own mind and then think "yeah i don't know how people would react if i voiced that view!" it's a lovely question. serious question though who gives a gently caress whether colleges are "intellectually free" (for right wingers to be cunts) anyway? people like to talk a big game about challenging ideas and poo poo but uh what student actually thinks like that? college is about getting either credentials or babysitting for four years. Homura and Sickle fucked around with this message at 11:55 on Nov 30, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2014 11:47
|
|
|
TheImmigrant posted:What does it mean to you? I did this for a year of ConLaw in law school, but I'm open-minded to hear whatever you think it means. lmao okay this is the best post in the thread
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
420DD Butts posted:That's my thought, as well. It's interesting to me because one of the recent cases of conservative outrage stemmed from a creationist biologist being fired by a university, presumably due to his beliefs. http://jonathanturley.org/2014/07/31/professor-claims-california-state-university-fired-him-over-his-creationists-belief/ lmao he published a paper saying he found evidence a triceratops died no more than 4000 years ago. yeah, his termination was pretty just because he's either incompetent or lying in his research.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:It's ridiculously easy to memorize a set of facts purely for the sake of passing a test and then immediately casting them out of your memory. Quite a few creationists get Bachelors, Masters, or even Doctorates in Biology by doing this and they do it because having that degree makes them an "authority" on the subject that other creationists can point to to support their positions. probably doubly easy at the borderline fake school Liberty University, which was this dude's alma mater. makes one wonder why in the gently caress the california state system hired him in the first place
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
no you see, while evolution can happen on a short time frame it can't happen on a long one because challenging ideas, people.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
Omi-Polari posted:I read an interview with Chris Rock tonight where he said he stopped performing on college campuses because they have lame crowds. People uncomfortable with edgy racial humor, even when it's from a progressive point-of-view. A lot of these universities have a culture of stifled, paternalistic, colorblind liberalism where even pointing out someone's race can make people fidget uncomfortably. to be honest after hearing a ton of white racist people say "i don't hate black people i hate NIGGAS" i can see why people would be uncomfortable with his humor. though i suppose he had to retire that routine for just that reason
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2014 08:51
|
|
|
you could say that the snark is trying to shut down debate
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2014 23:55
|
|
|
you guys seem to treat hypothetical situations that demonstrate why your ideas are either dumb or exaggerated is "straw manning," and when you hand waive those away you're implicitly drawing a line where "free speech" should end. specifically, when you go WELL OBVIOUSLY THAT'S DIFFERENT you're saying speech should be restricted there, like in the intro to finance example, and avoid making a coherent argument where your particular example should be any different other than free market place of ideas bullshit Homura and Sickle fucked around with this message at 00:13 on Dec 2, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
spacetoaster posted:Not really. The religious stuff is easy to dismiss because it's not scientific and not many people actually believe it. It's when you start trotting out studies and statistics (disease rates, suicide rates, domestic abuse, drug abuse, etc) that people lose their ever-loving minds because they can't just hand wave it away.  now i get why this is a bug bear for you, you're a piece of poo poo
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD posted:As a Jewish student, I'm glad you used this example. If there was some weirdo spending my entire finance class sitting behind me, seething at the global Jewish conspiracy to control banking, I would much rather have him shout it out, and for the class to work it out as a group, then for him to sit there and learn nothing. I'd be the first to explain why he was being dumb. It's basically the only chance for students like that to learn. Ignoring it leads to the situation that the amici in Grutter saw in their own ranks. If you don't use educational facilities to educate racists, they'll just keep on being racists, straight through to where they occupy positions in industry where they discriminate against others and harm economic productivity. yeah but that doesn't prepare anybody to read a balance sheet and it just wastes everyone's time for the benefit of one crazy person that probably will not change his mind honestly the idea that class should be a free for all is a very strange one. if you consider tuition to be paying for the lectures (obviously it pays for more than that but for simplicity's sake), at a number of schools a single lecture costs hundreds of dollars per student. a professor wasting classroom resources humoring an idiot would, and should, provoke outrage amongst the students that want to learn the actual topic they signed up for Homura and Sickle fucked around with this message at 01:37 on Dec 2, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD posted:Yeah, I guess all those educational institutions, top companies, and the military were just wrong about the important things in education. Who cares about biogtry? As long as we can turn out people who can read a balance sheet, who cares if they're all bigoted white dudes? it is very odd to me that you equate affirmative action to allowing non-germane discussions in class. it doesn't seem at all relevant, since the diverse viewpoints should be at least germane to the material the course is about, otherwise they contribute nothing. also a nitpick, but you are also misstating the military's argument in grutter, they stated that race conscious admissions were important to facilitate a diverse officer corps itself (through ROTC, since race conscious admissions already existed at the service academy), not that the white officers understand the blacks better from their exposure to them in college.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
LaughMyselfTo posted:It'd be so meta if a mod killed this thread. and like many of the examples, entirely justified
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
wow really sympathetic example free speech is criminal assault perpetrated by rape supporters. okay good thanks for proving to me your view is stupid and bad Homura and Sickle fucked around with this message at 04:24 on Dec 4, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2014 04:22
|
|
|
hah yeah threatening rape victims is how we settle our differences here in the political arena much to be gained
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2014 04:28
|
|
|
one side says sexual violence is bad and one side says they're dirty whores and throws objects at them maybe... maybe the truth is in the middle
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 11:31 |
|
|
assault is actually not lawful
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2014 04:35
|
|