POLL: Is this in the best interests of our young people, or is it not?

[Mac1958]

Let's get to the heart of the issue of our young people and speakers.

Here's my position: It's a moral and cultural obligation of ours, as citizens of the United States, to promote and enable our young people to be exposed to contrary, stimulating, challenging, and yes, even controversial opinions at every opportunity. It is in their best interests, and the best interests of our country, to do so.

And further, there is no better place or time in their lives to be challenged like this than their college years. If we do not, we are doing our young people and our country a terrible disservice.

Do you agree or disagree? And please note: This is NOT a First Amendment issue, so let's not go there.
.

Too vague.

If you were female then I could see the cryptic writing.

If you are male then you are becoming effeminate.

That's really the best you can do?

If you don't agree with the post, you could at least have the balls to say so.

But that's okay, you're not the only one to try the standard avoid/pivot/attack diversion.

Very instructive thread here, my suspicions have been confirmed. Again.
.

 

[WaitingFor2020]

Let's get to the heart of the issue of our young people and speakers.

Here's my position: It's a moral and cultural obligation of ours, as citizens of the United States, to promote and enable our young people to be exposed to contrary, stimulating, challenging, and yes, even controversial opinions at every opportunity. It is in their best interests, and the best interests of our country, to do so.

And further, there is no better place or time in their lives to be challenged like this than their college years. If we do not, we are doing our young people and our country a terrible disservice.

Do you agree or disagree? And please note: This is NOT a First Amendment issue, so let's not go there.
.

Yep. I agree. I recall reading a great article a couple of years ago in the Atlantic Monthly about "micro aggressions" on campus. All of this is a result of helicoptering parents which some psychologists say got its start with the sensationalized disappearance of Etan Patz in New York City years ago. We're not doing kids any favors by protecting them from everything.

 

[Mac1958]

Let's get to the heart of the issue of our young people and speakers.

Here's my position: It's a moral and cultural obligation of ours, as citizens of the United States, to promote and enable our young people to be exposed to contrary, stimulating, challenging, and yes, even controversial opinions at every opportunity. It is in their best interests, and the best interests of our country, to do so.

And further, there is no better place or time in their lives to be challenged like this than their college years. If we do not, we are doing our young people and our country a terrible disservice.

Do you agree or disagree? And please note: This is NOT a First Amendment issue, so let's not go there.
.

Yep. I agree. I recall reading a great article a couple of years ago in the Atlantic Monthly about "micro aggressions" on campus. All of this is a result of helicoptering parents which some psychologists say got its start with the sensationalized disappearance of Etan Patz in New York City years ago. We're not doing kids any favors by protecting them from everything.

Thank you.
.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Do they still have Debate Clubs?

Seriously?

• National Forensic Association
  
• Council of Forensic Organizations
  
  • National Tournament Calendar
• Forensics | American Forensic Association
  
• https://www.speechanddebate.org/
  
• http://www.phirhopi.org/

 

[WaitingFor2020]

What the hell do you want done about Coulter?

Done? Let her do her stupid little talk without disruption and everyone can get on with their lives.

That's it.
.

I would LOVE to be in the audience when that cadaverous, hateful media whore takes the stage. Disrupt? You betcha'. These Berkeley kids should go and boo her off the stage. What are they thinking? Enjoy these opportunities while they can!

 

[Mac1958]

What the hell do you want done about Coulter?

Done? Let her do her stupid little talk without disruption and everyone can get on with their lives.

That's it.
.

I would LOVE to be in the audience when that cadaverous, hateful media whore takes the stage. Disrupt? You betcha'. These Berkeley kids should go and boo her off the stage. What are they thinking? Enjoy these opportunities while they can!

Oh, I'd let her talk. I'd let some KKK goon talk. I'd let some communist goon talk. Crank it up, let's hear it.

I want the crazies to have every opportunity to expose themselves. One of the best benefits of open expression.
.

 

[WaitingFor2020]

What the hell do you want done about Coulter?

Done? Let her do her stupid little talk without disruption and everyone can get on with their lives.

That's it.
.

I would LOVE to be in the audience when that cadaverous, hateful media whore takes the stage. Disrupt? You betcha'. These Berkeley kids should go and boo her off the stage. What are they thinking? Enjoy these opportunities while they can!

Oh, I'd let her talk. I'd let some KKK goon talk. I'd let some communist goon talk. Crank it up, let's hear it.

I want the crazies to have every opportunity to expose themselves. One of the best benefits of open expression.
.

I'd definitely go hear a KKK goon talk. I'm not proposing disruption occur immediately, just after the first lie or two. Coulter wants to go speak on what is probably the most liberal college campus in the country, she'd better be ready to take the heat.

I wanted to go to one of Trump's rallies but the venue/facility was rather small which created long lines outside and people turned away. Ya' think that was on purpose? I do. The guy is a cockroach but he really understands television, staging, how to frame a shot and how a live shot converts to a television screen.

 

[ricechickie]

The dumbest thing about this discussion is that the OP thinks progressives don't want young people to be exposed to a variety of viewpoints.

Basically, young people at institutions of higher learning have made it known that they don't want to be associated with opportunistic charlatans like Ann Coulter.

They aren't afraid to hear what she says. They just don't want their institutions to lend credibility to it.

Get it? Will you ever get it?

She wouldn't have credibility if no one chose to show up. Trying to block her makes the student body lose credibility, IMO.

Incorrect.

We can disagree.

But it does make them look incredibly touchy and whiny, when they want to block someone who has been invited to speak. When her speaking to an empty hall would be a much better response.

 

[Desperado]

No one is forcing the people to attend the events.
If they don't want to hear Anne Coulter no one is forcing them to attend.
These little snowflakes just want to shut down any ideas that they don"t agree with.
Their right not to be offended does not override my right to hear Anne's views.

 

[Mac1958]

...it does make them look incredibly touchy and whiny, when they want to block someone who has been invited to speak. When her speaking to an empty hall would be a much better response.

Clearly there are people who are afraid to let her speak. But what they somehow don't understand is that they're helping her with their behavior.

The kids could have stayed home during her little talk, done some homework, played some beer pong and ignored the whole thing. We never would have heard about it, nor would we have cared.

But no, they have to go nuts.
.

 

[Timmy]

Let's get to the heart of the issue of our young people and speakers.

Here's my position: It's a moral and cultural obligation of ours, as citizens of the United States, to promote and enable our young people to be exposed to contrary, stimulating, challenging, and yes, even controversial opinions at every opportunity. It is in their best interests, and the best interests of our country, to do so.

And further, there is no better place or time in their lives to be challenged like this than their college years. If we do not, we are doing our young people and our country a terrible disservice.

Do you agree or disagree? And please note: This is NOT a First Amendment issue, so let's not go there.
.

Sure you should have all kinds of speakers .

Here's the thing wh college . Everyone wants to be wannabe 60s protesters . It's like , every class needs to make a stand . They are looking for somthing to protest .

 

[NYcarbineer]

The dumbest thing about this discussion is that the OP thinks progressives don't want young people to be exposed to a variety of viewpoints.

Basically, young people at institutions of higher learning have made it known that they don't want to be associated with opportunistic charlatans like Ann Coulter.

They aren't afraid to hear what she says. They just don't want to their institutions to lend credibility to it.

Get it? Will you ever get it?

So you disagree with my OP.

Thanks.

And of COURSE you Regressives "don't want young people to be exposed to a variety of viewpoints" if you don't like those viewpoints. You're liars and cowards.

I appreciate the input.
.

I think of our difference as more of how we define "young people". I associated the term primarily with grammar school youngsters and beginning high school students. I then associate young adults as more mature high school juniors and seniors and college age people.

No, I mean college-age kids, people who have reached a point of development at which they can make reasonably mature analyses and judgements.

Yeah, I wouldn't see much positive value in this for younger kids, although obviously everyone is different.
.

what's the value of a bigot like Ann Coulter speaking at Berkeley? Do you think that it's valuable to society if in some way some otherwise unbigoted student adopt her bigotry?

 

[ricechickie]

The dumbest thing about this discussion is that the OP thinks progressives don't want young people to be exposed to a variety of viewpoints.

Basically, young people at institutions of higher learning have made it known that they don't want to be associated with opportunistic charlatans like Ann Coulter.

They aren't afraid to hear what she says. They just don't want to their institutions to lend credibility to it.

Get it? Will you ever get it?

So you disagree with my OP.

Thanks.

And of COURSE you Regressives "don't want young people to be exposed to a variety of viewpoints" if you don't like those viewpoints. You're liars and cowards.

I appreciate the input.
.

I think of our difference as more of how we define "young people". I associated the term primarily with grammar school youngsters and beginning high school students. I then associate young adults as more mature high school juniors and seniors and college age people.

No, I mean college-age kids, people who have reached a point of development at which they can make reasonably mature analyses and judgements.

Yeah, I wouldn't see much positive value in this for younger kids, although obviously everyone is different.
.

what's the value of a bigot like Ann Coulter speaking at Berkeley? Do you think that it's valuable to society if in some way some otherwise unbigoted student adopt her bigotry?

Search me. She is outrageous enough.....kind of a "shock pundit." Maybe this is how the marketplace of ideas works, when you don't have to be the smartest, just the most brash--

Hey, I think I just figured out how Trump won!

 

[Desperado]

The dumbest thing about this discussion is that the OP thinks progressives don't want young people to be exposed to a variety of viewpoints.

Basically, young people at institutions of higher learning have made it known that they don't want to be associated with opportunistic charlatans like Ann Coulter.

They aren't afraid to hear what she says. They just don't want to their institutions to lend credibility to it.

Get it? Will you ever get it?

So you disagree with my OP.

Thanks.

And of COURSE you Regressives "don't want young people to be exposed to a variety of viewpoints" if you don't like those viewpoints. You're liars and cowards.

I appreciate the input.
.

I think of our difference as more of how we define "young people". I associated the term primarily with grammar school youngsters and beginning high school students. I then associate young adults as more mature high school juniors and seniors and college age people.

No, I mean college-age kids, people who have reached a point of development at which they can make reasonably mature analyses and judgements.

Yeah, I wouldn't see much positive value in this for younger kids, although obviously everyone is different.
.

what's the value of a bigot like Ann Coulter speaking at Berkeley? Do you think that it's valuable to society if in some way some otherwise unbigoted student adopt her bigotry?

So we are going to let you decide who should speak and who should not? Thanks but no
It may come as a shock to you but a lot of people do not think that Ann Coulter is a bigot

 

[NYcarbineer]

The dumbest thing about this discussion is that the OP thinks progressives don't want young people to be exposed to a variety of viewpoints.

Basically, young people at institutions of higher learning have made it known that they don't want to be associated with opportunistic charlatans like Ann Coulter.

They aren't afraid to hear what she says. They just don't want to their institutions to lend credibility to it.

Get it? Will you ever get it?

So you disagree with my OP.

Thanks.

And of COURSE you Regressives "don't want young people to be exposed to a variety of viewpoints" if you don't like those viewpoints. You're liars and cowards.

I appreciate the input.
.

I think of our difference as more of how we define "young people". I associated the term primarily with grammar school youngsters and beginning high school students. I then associate young adults as more mature high school juniors and seniors and college age people.

No, I mean college-age kids, people who have reached a point of development at which they can make reasonably mature analyses and judgements.

Yeah, I wouldn't see much positive value in this for younger kids, although obviously everyone is different.
.

what's the value of a bigot like Ann Coulter speaking at Berkeley? Do you think that it's valuable to society if in some way some otherwise unbigoted student adopt her bigotry?

So we are going to let you decide who should speak and who should not? Thanks but no
It may come as a shock to you but a lot of people do not think that Ann Coulter is a bigot

Nothing about the Right's depravity shocks me.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The dumbest thing about this discussion is that the OP thinks progressives don't want young people to be exposed to a variety of viewpoints.

Basically, young people at institutions of higher learning have made it known that they don't want to be associated with opportunistic charlatans like Ann Coulter.

They aren't afraid to hear what she says. They just don't want to their institutions to lend credibility to it.

Get it? Will you ever get it?

So you disagree with my OP.

Thanks.

And of COURSE you Regressives "don't want young people to be exposed to a variety of viewpoints" if you don't like those viewpoints. You're liars and cowards.

I appreciate the input.
.

I think of our difference as more of how we define "young people". I associated the term primarily with grammar school youngsters and beginning high school students. I then associate young adults as more mature high school juniors and seniors and college age people.

No, I mean college-age kids, people who have reached a point of development at which they can make reasonably mature analyses and judgements.

Yeah, I wouldn't see much positive value in this for younger kids, although obviously everyone is different.
.

what's the value of a bigot like Ann Coulter speaking at Berkeley? Do you think that it's valuable to society if in some way some otherwise unbigoted student adopt her bigotry?

Search me. She is outrageous enough.....kind of a "shock pundit." Maybe this is how the marketplace of ideas works, when you don't have to be the smartest, just the most brash--

Hey, I think I just figured out how Trump won!

Coulter sells rightwing propaganda. It's really no more complicated than that. The idea that it's some sort of free speech issue over whether or not she should be allowed on a campus to sell her commodity is preposterous.

 

[ricechickie]

So you disagree with my OP.

Thanks.

And of COURSE you Regressives "don't want young people to be exposed to a variety of viewpoints" if you don't like those viewpoints. You're liars and cowards.

I appreciate the input.
.

I think of our difference as more of how we define "young people". I associated the term primarily with grammar school youngsters and beginning high school students. I then associate young adults as more mature high school juniors and seniors and college age people.

No, I mean college-age kids, people who have reached a point of development at which they can make reasonably mature analyses and judgements.

Yeah, I wouldn't see much positive value in this for younger kids, although obviously everyone is different.
.

what's the value of a bigot like Ann Coulter speaking at Berkeley? Do you think that it's valuable to society if in some way some otherwise unbigoted student adopt her bigotry?

Search me. She is outrageous enough.....kind of a "shock pundit." Maybe this is how the marketplace of ideas works, when you don't have to be the smartest, just the most brash--

Hey, I think I just figured out how Trump won!

Coulter sells rightwing propaganda. It's really no more complicated than that. The idea that it's some sort of free speech issue over whether or not she should be allowed on a campus to sell her commodity is preposterous.

How will those students ever learn to recognize and counter propaganda if they are never given the chance to hear and counter propaganda?

By high school, they should start practicing separating bullshit from fact. It's a dying skill.

 

[Darkwind]

I voted No. The OP question hit as arguing for argument sake. I think a firm foundation should first be established by parents for young people and save the debate clubs for high school students.

Okay, great. Are you saying that no speakers should be allowed on campus?
.

He is saying only speakers whom he agrees with should be allowed to speak. Anywhere.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I think of our difference as more of how we define "young people". I associated the term primarily with grammar school youngsters and beginning high school students. I then associate young adults as more mature high school juniors and seniors and college age people.

No, I mean college-age kids, people who have reached a point of development at which they can make reasonably mature analyses and judgements.

Yeah, I wouldn't see much positive value in this for younger kids, although obviously everyone is different.
.

what's the value of a bigot like Ann Coulter speaking at Berkeley? Do you think that it's valuable to society if in some way some otherwise unbigoted student adopt her bigotry?

Search me. She is outrageous enough.....kind of a "shock pundit." Maybe this is how the marketplace of ideas works, when you don't have to be the smartest, just the most brash--

Hey, I think I just figured out how Trump won!

Coulter sells rightwing propaganda. It's really no more complicated than that. The idea that it's some sort of free speech issue over whether or not she should be allowed on a campus to sell her commodity is preposterous.

How will those students ever learn to recognize and counter propaganda if they are never given the chance to hear and counter propaganda?

By high school, they should start practicing separating bullshit from fact. It's a dying skill.

I already pointed out that Coulter's books are in the Berkeley library. She's all over the internet. She
goes on tv. It's 2017. Any kid who wants to learn about Coulter can do so in minutes.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I voted No. The OP question hit as arguing for argument sake. I think a firm foundation should first be established by parents for young people and save the debate clubs for high school students.

Okay, great. Are you saying that no speakers should be allowed on campus?
.

He is saying only speakers whom he agrees with should be allowed to speak. Anywhere.

What happened to your love of the free market?