Berkeley riot organizer = insane idealogue

MrsDash

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:11 pm

I've been lurking in this thread and was debating whether or not I should respond. Yowza! I can't believe what I'm reading! I feel there is more hate and animosity towards each other than there is on this topic.

I don't even know how to respond here. The only thing I can think of doing is posting a few pictures of my post bath, wet birdies. Enjoy!

marina

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:13 pm

Squishy wrote:

There is a bill before congress to get rid of the IRS. You can hold your breath before either bill gets passed.

Yes, but this thread is about the evil Left who had a violent protest on a college campus and shut down Milo's speech. Not about the evil left who is trying to eliminate taxes.

So I am giving an example of how conservative *leaders* are trying to kill free speech. Whether it will come into law is irrelevant. Just like it is irrelevant whether the violent protest resulted in Milo not being able to speak or if he did eventually speak. Right? I mean if Milo spoke, we'd still have a problem with the Big Bad Left who resort to violence to stifle our Constitutional rights?

SixOfWands

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:13 pm

Squishy wrote:

My distinction is that she had no foundation for what she said. If she could have backed it up, I would be interested.

I won't wander into the muck that's out there, but plenty of people believe that there's plenty out there to support it. Google Alex Jones 9/11 Jews if you care to get sick.

Laiya

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:14 pm

marina wrote:

Ok, my First Amendment zealots.

Who is upset about this? Anyone?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/.....ation

If you don't like the source for that, here's the bill itself

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/leg.....SF288

Tell me how much it bothers you that LEGISLATORS (not crazy college kids and middle school teachers) introduced a law requiring universities to condition hiring based on political party affiliation.

Does this vicious assault on the First Amendment make you worry at night? Are you going to post a thread about this on imamother? Or are you like: YOU GO IOWA!

The bill is calling for *balance*, or a more or less even number of liberals and conservatives holding faculty positions.

It's attempting to solve a problem that already exists. The problem is that the hiring of professors based on political views is going on in any event.

Iow, the bill aims to ALLOW students to be exposed to a diversity of views.

Arguments can be made for or against, but calling it an assault on free speech is a bit of an over-simplification.

marina

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:18 pm

Laiya wrote:

This is what I mean, Squishy. Conservatives defending a measure that would blatantly violate free speech rights - a bill that would condition hiring on the content of the speech. Which every single Justice and scholar would find to be impermissible.

But our Free Speech Zealots aren't too worried.

chaiz

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:19 pm

Laiya wrote:

So it is not that much different than quotas for college admissions. What would happen if a similar law was passed, but this time it was for females?

33055

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:21 pm

marina wrote:

So people should be able to speak only when their words are true? When they can back up what they want to speak about?

Should Milo be allowed to speak at Oberlin about how fat people should hate themselves and people on birth control should stop being such ugly sluts?

I was going to add if she was sarcastic. If she was being sarcastic about her statements like you were on this thread, then I support her right. Her statements were unsupportable.

I don't happen to believe that Jews are always right. I believe we need honest self examination of our actions (as do other groups).

I posted a thread awhile back about how I wish DH were honest with me when I gained weight. The majority of posters thought I was wrong, but I do support honesty. It is not PC but it is how I feel. I would not have gained weight if he didn't keep telling me how beautiful I look. I wouldn't have had my health issues if I didn't gain the weight.

My health issues disappeared. And DH truly is more attracted to me. When I asked him why he lied, he said he didn't want me to feel bad.

Milo has some good points in his sarcasm.

https://www.google.com/amp/www......html

SixOfWands

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:21 pm

Laiya wrote:

So less qualified conservatives should be entitled to jobs simply because of their political beliefs?

Laiya

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:22 pm

marina wrote:

Notice, I very specifically did NOT defend the bill. Why are you misstating what I just wrote a minute ago?

Calling it an assault on free speech is an over-simplification.

Laiya

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:24 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

So less qualified conservatives should be entitled to jobs simply because of their political beliefs?

Again, I did not write that I support the bill; nor did I suggest any alternative legislation. The bill is seeking to address a problem.

Hopefully, we can agree that there IS a problem that needs to be addressed.

Eta. I happen to think that, as things stand, most certainly, MORE qualified conservatives are not getting jobs, because of their political beliefs.

But that's not the issue. The issue is, as Marina pointed out, whether free speech can be legislated in this way.

Last edited by Laiya on Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:29 pm; edited 1 time in total

ora_43

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:26 pm

marina,
The thing is, what people here are complaining about isn't necessarily the last step of the process - from "this speech directly incites to violence" to "we should stop it."

It could be the first steps - from "this guy is mean" to "this guy is Hitler."

So no, somebody isn't necessarily hypocritical if they think that someone like Milo shouldn't be violently prevented from speaking, but wouldn't stick up for actual Nazis.

33055

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:27 pm

marina wrote:

You can't take a bill seriously because it is introduced. Only 4% become law in congress. Too many bills are introduced to pander to constituents.

33055

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:29 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

So less qualified conservatives should be entitled to jobs simply because of their political beliefs?

Who said they are less qualified?

Who says the current faculty is more qualified rather than just aligned with the thinking of the current faculty.

marina

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:30 pm

Squishy wrote:

You can't take a bill seriously because it is introduced. Only 4% become law in congress. Too many bills are introduced to pander to constituents.

Ok. Why are you taking a dumb *** middle school teacher seriously? She has less clout than the legislators.

marina

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:32 pm

For example, if legislators introduced a law - even one that wouldn't pass- saying that Milo can't speak on college campuses, I would be horrified and deeply disturbed. I would probably write letters and call.

Unfathomable scenario.

marina

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:36 pm

ora_43 wrote:

I don't understand. Can you plse rephrase

marina

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:39 pm

Laiya wrote:

Notice, I very specifically did NOT defend the bill. Why are you misstating what I just wrote a minute ago?

Calling it an assault on free speech is an over-simplification.

If you are explaining to us why the bill is not so bad, that is a defense. Right? Isn't that what defending means?

And why do you think it is an oversimplification? the constitution would never allow this

33055

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 12:58 pm

marina wrote:

Ok. Why are you taking a dumb *** middle school teacher seriously? She has less clout than the legislators.

She clouted someone with a stick. She belongs in prison. If the legislators were hitting each other with sticks then they also belong in prison.

She is from Malaysia, and canning is a norm there. If she wants to be part of our society, then she must respect our norms which is not to hit people.

Last edited by 33055 on Tue, Feb 21 2017, 1:00 pm; edited 1 time in total

33055

Tue, Feb 21 2017, 1:09 pm

marina wrote:

Prison seems a little harsh for the equivalent of a bar fight, but ok. Maybe. Still she has no agency and her brawl concerns me not a drop.

You are much more tolerant than me of this. No one has a right to attack anyone with a stick even if they are in a bar. People need to feel safe. Perhaps that is the root of our disagreement. I don't like disorder and violence and crudeness. It scares me.

Is it ok to wack your domestic partner with a stick ? How about your children? How about a man attacking a woman with a stick?