So typical: Leftist university bans conservative speaker to protect their whiny, brainwashed progen

[ClosedCaption]

the university has no responsibility to give hate speech a microphone

Oh, please. Hate speech!? Ben Shapiro is a whiny little bitch but let's not over do it. lol

more of a general statement. a university has no obligation to give opinions counter to their values a forum.

not all opinions are equal, not all should be heard.

But he's a taxpayer! That means they should welcome him or feel the wrath of his whining!

 

[Disgruntled_American]

the university has no responsibility to give hate speech a microphone

"Hate speech" seems to be defined as "Saying something they don't like". Hate speech is calling Jews inferior to "regular folk". Hate speech is saying that blacks should be killed. That isn't what this guys is doing.

Being a holocaust denier (as much as it is a nutter position) is not hate speech.

call it what you want the university has no responsibility to give his opinions credibility by allowing him to speak.

quite the opposite, actually

Allowing someone to speak isn't making them credible it is showing a different position. Why does a different position scare you so much. Should people all have "like-think" instead?

please. you don't think having given speeches at universities bolsters the credibility of an individual?

Nope, because the views of those that either agree or disagree with the individual do not change.

 

[hadit]

the university has no responsibility to give hate speech a microphone

There is no explicit written "social contract" either, yet a lot of people believe society should act like there is. Universities are supposed to challenge students to think critically, to make up their own minds on the issues after careful thought, and to expose them to differing viewpoints. That sometimes means the poor dears might actually be confronted with ideas and opinions they don't like, and <shudder> actually have to think about their own viewpoints. This is not a bad thing. The healthy response to this kind of speaker is to hear him out and hold discussions between faculty and students on the issues presented. To do otherwise is to create an echo chamber of reinforced faculty viewpoints, not a liberal arts education.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I think he should be allowed to speak there. After all he IS a tax payer and all tax payers get to speak there

 

[007]

the university has no responsibility to give hate speech a microphone

Where is the "hate" in white pride, and not in all the black only organizations and entities?

Let's see how you can dance around that 900 pound gorilla in the room.

 

[mdk]

He intends to hold the speech anyway and plans to sue if he can't use the venue the university previously approved. lol

 

[007]

Leftists have ONE agenda when it comes to THEIR agenda, and that is to SHUT YOU THE FUCK UP if you do NOT agree with them.

They are the new THIRD REICH.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Maybe they felt that $600 was better spent on education rather than protecting bigots ?

They have actually made a commitment to letting him speak at a later date.

 

[Disgruntled_American]

Leftists have ONE agenda when it comes to THEIR agenda, and that is SHUT YOU THE FUCK UP if you do NOT agree with them.

They are the new THIRD REICH.

So then you were against Bush's free speech zones when he was president right?

Forcing people to protest miles away from a president isn't exactly free speech either so don't kid yourself that the right doesn't do the same thing.

Look at the censorship on T.V. for crying out loud from all the whiny religious groups. The right censors things they feel are "immoral" all the time.

 

[reconmark]

During his freshman year at Michigan State University, he was elected president of the campus conservative group, Young Americans for Freedom (YAF).

Kyle Bristow first gained notoriety when he began inviting white nationalists to speak on campus while he led the Young Americans for Freedom (YAF) chapter at Michigan State University in 2006.
While attending law school in 2010, he published White Apocalypse, a novel seething with lethal white supremacist revenge fantasies against Jewish professors, Latino and American Indian activists and staffers of a group clearly modeled on the SPLC.

One of Bristow’s most inflammatory tactics was inviting virulently racist and anti-Semitic leaders to speak on the MSU campus — acts that triggered disciplinary threats from the national YAF group. Among those speakers was British National Party chairman Nick Griffin, a Holocaust-denier and white supremacist.

Yeah, can't wait to have him back on campus spreading peace and respect...

Well if you are implying some people or speakers are simply too radical or hate-filled to be allowed to speak I would have to agree with you. I would probably put Louis Farrakhan in that group, but he never seems to have a problem getting invited. I would also include the professor Bill Ayers as a disallowed terrorist, you know. Obama's good pal?

But why are you citing this article above? Who is Kyle Bristow? No one is talking about him, a radical at MSU in 2006?

Obviously the "President of the "Young Americans for Freedom" reference seems to have conveniently escaped you.

 

[Mac1958]

Universities have a duty of care to their students. That includes protecting them from nutters.

And here, folks, is a perfect example of what is happening on campus.

These people have zero interest in the free exchange of ideas, none.

THEY will be the judge of who is and who is not a "nutter".

They're perfectly happy shutting down opposing speech. What a damn shame.
.

 

[007]

Leftists have ONE agenda when it comes to THEIR agenda, and that is SHUT YOU THE FUCK UP if you do NOT agree with them.

They are the new THIRD REICH.

So then you were against Bush's free speech zones when he was president right?

Forcing people to protest miles away from a president isn't exactly free speech either so don't kid yourself that the right doesn't do the same thing.

Look at the censorship on T.V. for crying out loud from all the whiny religious groups. The right censors things they feel are "immoral" all the time.

Where the fuck you come up with that shit?

 

[ogibillm]

the university has no responsibility to give hate speech a microphone

There is no explicit written "social contract" either, yet a lot of people believe society should act like there is. Universities are supposed to challenge students to think critically, to make up their own minds on the issues after careful thought, and to expose them to differing viewpoints. That sometimes means the poor dears might actually be confronted with ideas and opinions they don't like, and <shudder> actually have to think about their own viewpoints. This is not a bad thing. The healthy response to this kind of speaker is to hear him out and hold discussions between faculty and students on the issues presented. To do otherwise is to create an echo chamber of reinforced faculty viewpoints, not a liberal arts education.

again, the University is under no obligation to lend credibility to ever whack job and nutty opinion out there.
they do have a responsibility to safeguard their own reputation

 

[Tilly]

The word "university" is derived from the Latin universitas magistrorum et scholarium, which roughly means "community of teachers and scholars."[1] Universitas is a Latin word meaning "the whole, total ,the universe, the world.

University shouldn't be a place you only get to hear what you want to hear. Looks like it also shouldn't be a place for the over sensitive.

 

[007]

Universities have a duty of care to their students. That includes protecting them from nutters.

And here, folks, is a perfect example of what is happening on campus.

These people have zero interest in the free exchange of ideas, none.

They're perfectly happy shutting down opposing speech. What a damn shame.
.

And they're doing so now without any pretense. They're not even trying to hide it anymore. It's in your face.

 

[Disgruntled_American]

Leftists have ONE agenda when it comes to THEIR agenda, and that is SHUT YOU THE FUCK UP if you do NOT agree with them.

They are the new THIRD REICH.

So then you were against Bush's free speech zones when he was president right?

Forcing people to protest miles away from a president isn't exactly free speech either so don't kid yourself that the right doesn't do the same thing.

Look at the censorship on T.V. for crying out loud from all the whiny religious groups. The right censors things they feel are "immoral" all the time.

Where the fuck you come up with that shit?

You mean the truth? What part are you denying?

 

[007]

This is what I mean when I insist that there is no use "compromising" with these sniveling libturd parasites. You don't make deals with these oxygen thieves, YOU DEFEAT THEM. You jab a finger in their eye, kick their pathetic shriveled ball sack, elbow them in the temple and curb stomp them.

Every chance they get they defeat US, their enemies are WE THE PEOPLE who have reverence for the Constitution, and appreciate being the last country on earth where people have real rights. These leftist sociopaths endeavor to turn this country into a soviet hell hole, with themselves at the top of the pecking order, and the servile insects who vote democrook believe it's about "equality".

It's about equality all right. Equal poverty across the board for the proles, and equal dominance for the elite.

Lets wait for jerkoff fakey or one of his socks to come in and babble about "reactionaries" now, as if that fuckhead even knows what the word means.

I agree 100% Pete... it's time to kick some fucking pajama boy nads up around their sissie shoulders.

 

[hadit]

the university has no responsibility to give hate speech a microphone

There is no explicit written "social contract" either, yet a lot of people believe society should act like there is. Universities are supposed to challenge students to think critically, to make up their own minds on the issues after careful thought, and to expose them to differing viewpoints. That sometimes means the poor dears might actually be confronted with ideas and opinions they don't like, and <shudder> actually have to think about their own viewpoints. This is not a bad thing. The healthy response to this kind of speaker is to hear him out and hold discussions between faculty and students on the issues presented. To do otherwise is to create an echo chamber of reinforced faculty viewpoints, not a liberal arts education.

again, the University is under no obligation to lend credibility to ever whack job and nutty opinion out there.
they do have a responsibility to safeguard their own reputation

And again, to insist on homogeneity of thought is to violate the very idea of a liberal arts education. Think of it this way, who decides that an opinion is "nutty"? Who decides that a speaker is a "whack job"? Naturally, you don't invite Bill Clinton to discuss physics, but you MIGHT invite a Black Panther to speak to a class on race relations. Why? To give the students exposure to negative attitudes you then proceed to dismantle. Of course, you might also accidentally show these purveyors of attitudes to be real people with valid concerns instead of cartoonish monsters, and we can't have that. The Black Panther stereotype, for example, is a large black man carrying a weapon, out to destroy ******. Hearing one speak might inspire some students to begin thinking of what life as a black man in liberal America's ghettos is really like, and what causes negative attitudes toward people with different skin colors. We can't have that.

 

[007]

Leftists have ONE agenda when it comes to THEIR agenda, and that is SHUT YOU THE FUCK UP if you do NOT agree with them.

They are the new THIRD REICH.

So then you were against Bush's free speech zones when he was president right?

Forcing people to protest miles away from a president isn't exactly free speech either so don't kid yourself that the right doesn't do the same thing.

Look at the censorship on T.V. for crying out loud from all the whiny religious groups. The right censors things they feel are "immoral" all the time.

Where the fuck you come up with that shit?

You mean the truth? What part are you denying?

You wouldn't know the truth if it shit in your face. You're as bad as our other board jackass pretender, Fakey.

Now go stand back on your head in that 55 gallon barrel of bull shit you live in, I think you're a couple quarts low.

 

[Disgruntled_American]

Leftists have ONE agenda when it comes to THEIR agenda, and that is SHUT YOU THE FUCK UP if you do NOT agree with them.

They are the new THIRD REICH.

So then you were against Bush's free speech zones when he was president right?

Forcing people to protest miles away from a president isn't exactly free speech either so don't kid yourself that the right doesn't do the same thing.

Look at the censorship on T.V. for crying out loud from all the whiny religious groups. The right censors things they feel are "immoral" all the time.

Where the fuck you come up with that shit?

You mean the truth? What part are you denying?

You wouldn't know the truth if it shit in your face. You're as bad as our other board jackass pretender, Fakey.

Now go stand back on your head in that 55 gallon barrel of bull shit you live in, I think you're a couple quarts low.

Duck and dodge when you are proven wrong got it. That is the typical righty bullshit. You can't smell your own shit dumbass.