EverCurious
Gold Member
Meh, you want a fair government solution? Add "political views" to the stupid PA laws.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The security wouldn't be needed if left wing nuts knew how to behave in public.If colleges get ANY public funding it should be stripped of they persist with the nonsense. And Facebook needs to burn in hell but people are too stupid to give it up. Gotta tell ma & pa what I had for dinner yo. Beyond stupid. Social media is a poison even without the political bullshit. As for Hollywood I pirate every single movie they make, fuckem. Act like a douche I'll just steal your licensed material.
I disagree.
They should provide a fair assortment of diverse views. They don't HAVE to provide a platform for EVERY speaker. They shouldn't, for example, have to provide a platform for Neo-Nazi's. At this point though - I question whether they are providing enough diverse views - that is the purpose of college, regardless of whether public money is involved or not. And - keep in mind, protests are also free speech, as long as they are peaceful.
Colleges don't necessarily need to facilitate every speaker with campus space and funds, because obviously those things are in limited supply. They should NOT, however, be actively blocking speakers people want to hear.
And we're so far beyond "peaceful protests" at this point, we can't even see 'em from where we stand.
I think it depends. If the speaker is an agitator and requires high levels of security - should colleges have to support that? It's a fine line, but they absolutely support a diversity of voices.
Or rightwing nuts...like the ones that ran over a woman at a demonstration. Inciting a riot is as much a crime as rioting.
The security wouldn't be needed if left wing nuts knew how to behave in public.I disagree.
They should provide a fair assortment of diverse views. They don't HAVE to provide a platform for EVERY speaker. They shouldn't, for example, have to provide a platform for Neo-Nazi's. At this point though - I question whether they are providing enough diverse views - that is the purpose of college, regardless of whether public money is involved or not. And - keep in mind, protests are also free speech, as long as they are peaceful.
Colleges don't necessarily need to facilitate every speaker with campus space and funds, because obviously those things are in limited supply. They should NOT, however, be actively blocking speakers people want to hear.
And we're so far beyond "peaceful protests" at this point, we can't even see 'em from where we stand.
I think it depends. If the speaker is an agitator and requires high levels of security - should colleges have to support that? It's a fine line, but they absolutely support a diversity of voices.
Or rightwing nuts...like the ones that ran over a woman at a demonstration. Inciting a riot is as much a crime as rioting.
Yes, but merely daring to be openly conservative is NOT "inciting a riot".
If colleges get ANY public funding it should be stripped of they persist with the nonsense. And Facebook needs to burn in hell but people are too stupid to give it up. Gotta tell ma & pa what I had for dinner yo. Beyond stupid. Social media is a poison even without the political bullshit. As for Hollywood I pirate every single movie they make, fuckem. Act like a douche I'll just steal your licensed material.
I disagree.
They should provide a fair assortment of diverse views. They don't HAVE to provide a platform for EVERY speaker. They shouldn't, for example, have to provide a platform for Neo-Nazi's. At this point though - I question whether they are providing enough diverse views - that is the purpose of college, regardless of whether public money is involved or not. And - keep in mind, protests are also free speech, as long as they are peaceful.
Colleges don't necessarily need to facilitate every speaker with campus space and funds, because obviously those things are in limited supply. They should NOT, however, be actively blocking speakers people want to hear.
And we're so far beyond "peaceful protests" at this point, we can't even see 'em from where we stand.
I think it depends. If the speaker is an agitator and requires high levels of security - should colleges have to support that? It's a fine line, but they absolutely support a diversity of voices.
How are we defining "agitator requiring high levels of security"? Because it seems to ME that currently means "anyone conservative that the leftist savages want to riot over." You'll excuse me if I don't think the heckler's veto - or the thug's veto - should be making the decisions.
I think it's hard to define that is why I feel it's a fine line. But for example - should colleges be required to provide a platform for white nationalists, neo-nazi's, black nationalists...? People who advocate religious/racial/ethnic violence for example? I'm not just talking about conservative voices - for example Ann Coulter, I would consider a conservative voice who I can't stand but who should be allowed to speak if invited, not an agitator. AND those who disagree should be allowed to protest - short of violence or preventing the speaker from speaking. Milo Y on the other hand strikes me as nothing but a self serving agitator who's aim is to piss off and anger people.
The security wouldn't be needed if left wing nuts knew how to behave in public.Colleges don't necessarily need to facilitate every speaker with campus space and funds, because obviously those things are in limited supply. They should NOT, however, be actively blocking speakers people want to hear.
And we're so far beyond "peaceful protests" at this point, we can't even see 'em from where we stand.
I think it depends. If the speaker is an agitator and requires high levels of security - should colleges have to support that? It's a fine line, but they absolutely support a diversity of voices.
Or rightwing nuts...like the ones that ran over a woman at a demonstration. Inciting a riot is as much a crime as rioting.
Yes, but merely daring to be openly conservative is NOT "inciting a riot".
Of course not.
In the meantime...do conservative colleges invite flaming liberal speakers?
Meh, you want a fair government solution? Add "political views" to the stupid PA laws.
Do they threaten opposing voices like Berkley......Protest and Riot......How dare you talk on my liberal campus.........The security wouldn't be needed if left wing nuts knew how to behave in public.Colleges don't necessarily need to facilitate every speaker with campus space and funds, because obviously those things are in limited supply. They should NOT, however, be actively blocking speakers people want to hear.
And we're so far beyond "peaceful protests" at this point, we can't even see 'em from where we stand.
I think it depends. If the speaker is an agitator and requires high levels of security - should colleges have to support that? It's a fine line, but they absolutely support a diversity of voices.
Or rightwing nuts...like the ones that ran over a woman at a demonstration. Inciting a riot is as much a crime as rioting.
Yes, but merely daring to be openly conservative is NOT "inciting a riot".
Of course not.
In the meantime...do conservative colleges invite flaming liberal speakers?
Again, examples of "right-wingers" making speeches on college campuses "inciting" violence are required.The security wouldn't be needed if left wing nuts knew how to behave in public.If colleges get ANY public funding it should be stripped of they persist with the nonsense. And Facebook needs to burn in hell but people are too stupid to give it up. Gotta tell ma & pa what I had for dinner yo. Beyond stupid. Social media is a poison even without the political bullshit. As for Hollywood I pirate every single movie they make, fuckem. Act like a douche I'll just steal your licensed material.
I disagree.
They should provide a fair assortment of diverse views. They don't HAVE to provide a platform for EVERY speaker. They shouldn't, for example, have to provide a platform for Neo-Nazi's. At this point though - I question whether they are providing enough diverse views - that is the purpose of college, regardless of whether public money is involved or not. And - keep in mind, protests are also free speech, as long as they are peaceful.
Colleges don't necessarily need to facilitate every speaker with campus space and funds, because obviously those things are in limited supply. They should NOT, however, be actively blocking speakers people want to hear.
And we're so far beyond "peaceful protests" at this point, we can't even see 'em from where we stand.
I think it depends. If the speaker is an agitator and requires high levels of security - should colleges have to support that? It's a fine line, but they absolutely support a diversity of voices.
Or rightwing nuts...like the ones that ran over a woman at a demonstration. Inciting a riot is as much a crime as rioting.
You are mis-diagnosing the problem. It's not that the conservative perspective is excluded but that they aren't included by a majority of content seekers. You have to actually have an attractive product to gather popular support and low key bigotry is not that. I could sell the decent conservative ideas to a center-left person way better than how it is often packaged.From colleges to YouTube and now Diamond & Silk on Facebook.
Facebook to Diamond and Silk: Your content, brand ‘dangerous to the community’
Two conservative black women being targeted as a "danger to the community"
Seriously? Gtfo with this stupidity. They only thing they are a danger to is your oppression of conservative voices.
This shit has to be put to bed. Further segmenting our society & suppressing their voice is not the way you win a political debate.
Challenge them, argue with them, present them with an opposing view but to just outright silence them?
Just proves to me that the left are increasingly alarmed that their grasp on the media & their ability to force the conversation in a certain direction are under threat. They are clearly scared to death of free speech.