Berkeley Betrays Its Free Speech Legacy

Rune said:
Just like freedom of religion, the first also guarantees from religion.
Perhaps this is just a side of the First you haven't thought through.

Freedom from speech; say whatever the fuck you want but don't say it here.

Who pays the family of a student killed in a riot?

it is the age old balancing act of liberty and security and of course there are limits on free speech as well.

If you can't yell fire in a theater then maybe you shouldn't host right wing authoritarians at a liberal temple, knowing it will lead to destruction.

(I almost coined a new word; deshtruction)
Click to expand...

I think there's a problem with this take on the issue: anything Coulter is likely to say would definitely be classified as political speech so using the fire in a theater argument in this case is really just an attempt to de-legitimize the First Amendment, not support it.
 
cawacko said:
Where in the first amendment is there freedom from religion?

So having the choice of not hearing someone speak isn't sufficient you want no one to be able to hear them. Very "progressive"
Click to expand...
If you don't understand the concept of freedom from religion I can't communicate with you.
 
Guille said:
I think there's a problem with this take on the issue: anything Coulter is likely to say would definitely be classified as political speech so using the fire in a theater argument in this case is really just an attempt to de-legitimize the First Amendment, not support it.
Click to expand...
I am simply positing, not declaring.
 
Bigdog said:
It's illegal to riot. But since only liberal socialists riot and loot, it's ok, according to you. Liberals are violent pigs that riot and loot all the time, and you excuse this illegal behavior :palm:

If someone dies during a riot, the person that killed them is responsible for their death.

According to socialist pig logic, free speech doesn't exist in "liberal temples" or anywhere liberals threaten violence.
Click to expand...
Feel free to show where I support the students, asshole.
 
cawacko said:
Where in the first amendment is there freedom from religion?

So having the choice of not hearing someone speak isn't sufficient you want no one to be able to hear them. Very "progressive"
Click to expand...

Stand on the corner with your soapbox and bullhorn, not in my front yard.

Speak all you want, just don't try to force me to listen.
 
Universities are by and large public institutions, or private that invite a speaker.
There is no "freedom from religion" here.. Religious accomodation is for a private business in the marketplace
If you don't want to hear it, you are free not to go the event
 
the luciferian stronghold of "progressive" to hell training referred to as a "liberal temple" [Berkeley] should razed to the ground and plowed under. problem solved :no speech.
 
Rune said:
I am sorry.
I can't communicate with you.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
Rune said:
I assumed you read the article.

The school is cancelling speakers because they are scared of riots.
Click to expand...

So we have one thread where liberals are calling Coulter a pussy for not speaking and another thread where liberals are saying the school did the right thing in not letting her speak because of the threat of riots.

So is she a pussy or the school a pussy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top