The Congressional Hearings

[Laodicean60]

 

[MrMoe]

Oh look....the "I'll defend with my life your right to say it" crowd suddenly has a hissy fit when someone says something they don't ACTUALLY like.

Kinda shows the kind of speech they ACTUALLY like I guess.

I noticed you only quoted part of the quote. The full quote is "I disapprove of what you say, but I'll defend with my life your right to say it". This is people showing disapproval of what those presidents said. Or in your words, having a "hissy fit". So, basically, people exercising their right to free speech. It's strange you would be triggered by this. Especially when it's concerning something as serious as anti-Semitism.

 

[MrMoe]

Good short video about the disparity between the treatment of certain minorities that has revealed itself in campuses over the past few months.

 

[Arcangl86]

I haven't seen the hearings, but can somebody who has explain why exactly this is a Congressional issue?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I haven't seen the hearings, but can somebody who has explain why exactly this is a Congressional issue?

Free speech on campuses that are the recipients of federal funding... seems like it's at least somewhat relevant.

The legislative branch has taken up less relevant things in the past.

Remember when the Senate called in a bunch of baseball players to grill them on whether or not they were cheating at hitting homeruns?

I can't be the only one who remembers this:

Our current president gave an impassioned speech about how unamerican it is to take a substance that makes you better at sportsball
(although, his speech there showed some spark and energy that his current public engagements are lacking...for the people who insist "he hasn't lost a step", I implore them to watch his speech there and tell me his speech and cognition hasn't declined with a straight face.)

2005 Year-in-Review: Baseball & Steroids Hearings

Highlights of a March 17, 2005 hearing on steroid use in baseball were shown.

www.c-span.org

 

[Pommer]

That's an incredible statement after all of the complaints about conservatives who have been prevented from speaking on university campuses.

Remaining neutral when the left pushes the right out of the marketplace-of-ideas isn’t the boogeyman you might be thinking it to be?

 

[Valletta]

Remaining neutral when the left pushes the right out of the marketplace-of-ideas isn’t the boogeyman you might be thinking it to be?

It's your denial of the universities violating the rights of free speech that I find incredible. The two tiered system of justice seems as clear as can be to me.

 

[Pommer]

It's your denial of the universities violating the rights of free speech that I find incredible. The two tiered system of justice seems as clear as can be to me.

Unpopular ideas need “support” from Universities?
Why?

 

[KCfromNC]

Unpopular ideas need “support” from Universities?
Why?

Because otherwise how would modern conservationism survive in an environment where education and critical analysis of ideas are the cornerstone?
You can think of it as affirmative action for Republicans.

 

[rambot]

I noticed you only quoted part of the quote. The full quote is "I disapprove of what you say, but I'll defend with my life your right to say it". This is people showing disapproval of what those presidents said. Or in your words, having a "hissy fit". So, basically, people exercising their right to free speech. It's strange you would be triggered by this. Especially when it's concerning something as serious as anti-Semitism.

Perhaps you are unaware of the ambivalence often displayed towards hate speech targeting gay, tens people and minorities.
I'm not concerned about the legality at all...yes everyone is able to say whatever in the US.

It's just interesting to see that there is hate speech they DO have a problem with.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Unpopular ideas need “support” from Universities?
Why?

I don't think it's so much that people are demanding University "support" for unpopular ideas...it's the speech codes put in place that prevent people from expressing their ideas in public settings, while allowing people on the opposing side to express them at-will.

Had some of these school presidents not bent a knee to what their political allies wanted in terms of speech codes for the last 5 years, their "we have to defend free speech even it hurts someone's feelings" defense would've perhaps landed a little better now (or at least seemed like it was coming from a place of consistency)


To draw an analogy, if this was a debate about profanity & free expression in music, the "We have to defend expression even if someone gets offended" would be a lot more sincere/consistent coming from a Frank Zappa type (who always defended it and even went before congress to defend it) than it would be coming from a senator who just spent the last 5 years trying to restrict it (as a pandering effort), and now only wants it because someone on their side wants to use some of those "naughty words".

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I heard another interesting take on the situation in an interview recently (and I should've taken better notes because now for the life of me, I can't remember the name of the guy)...

But he was explaining his theory (which I thought was quite plausible) for why there were noticeable increases in hate activity and radicalization that seemed to follow speech laws aimed at reducing hate. ...and he was talking about it in the context of what's been seen in Ireland recently.

I'll paraphrase:
"When you push people, with viewpoints that have the propensity to trend toward the extreme, out of the general public conservations, you're all but guaranteeing that the only other people they'll ever talk to are the full blown extremists"

 

[MrMoe]

Perhaps you are unaware of the ambivalence often displayed towards hate speech targeting gay, tens people and minorities.

Could you give some examples. Because as the video I posted above shows, I see the exact opposite.
Gay and trans people are some of the most protected minorities against hate speech. But when it comes to Jews, all talk of "safe spaces" "safety first" "micro aggressions" and "speech can be violence" suddenly go out the window.

I'm not concerned about the legality at all...yes everyone is able to say whatever in the US.


It's just interesting to see that there is hate speech they DO have a problem with.

Who is "they" in this instance? Conservatives?

 

[rambot]

Could you give some examples. Because as the video I posted above shows, I see the exact opposite.

OK. How about calling trans people child abusers? Or groomers?

Gay and trans people are some of the most protected minorities against hate speech. But when it comes to Jews, all talk of "safe spaces" "safety first" "micro aggressions" and "speech can be violence" suddenly go out the window.

Nobody in the us is protected from hate speech anyways so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Who is "they" in this instance? Conservatives?

Some posters on this website.

 

[MrMoe]

OK. How about calling trans people child abusers? Or groomers?

Some can be, yes. You seem to be under the impression that when someone says that they mean all trans people. You're making the same mistake right wingers made when Hilary Clinton said there needs to be a deprogram of MAGA extremists, thinking she meant everyone who voted for Trump.

Nobody in the us is protected from hate speech anyways so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Well minorities are definitely coddled from supposed hate speech at these campuses. Something apparently not afforded to Jewish people.

Some posters on this website.

I've never seen any poster on this website say all trans people are child abusers or groomers. Every time it's been said it's always been in the context of a specific news story.

 

[Chesterton]

I haven't seen the hearings, but can somebody who has explain why exactly this is a Congressional issue?

1. A primary responsibility of any government is the safety of its citizens.

2. It's a civil rights issue. A primary responsibility of the American government, which places a high value on equality, is to ensure that people are treated equally.

3. A nation which in my father's lifetime had to fight a deadly war against Nazi ideology has a legitimate concern about a sudden outpouring of neo-Nazis onto our streets and college campuses.

 

[Chesterton]

Who knows. It's also (acording to the OP) some how "our Ivy League", but this seems like an Ivy League problem and not "ours".

It's very bad form to refer to another's post and make up some words and put them in quotations marks as if the poster said them when they didn't, but in this case you happen to be right. It seems the more prestigious the institution, the more evil and stupid it is.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Stefanik and Moskowitz lead bipartisan effort to oust presidents of Penn, Harvard, and MIT - Washington Examiner

Reps. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) and Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) are leading a bipartisan effort to convince three elite universities to fire their presidents following a controversial congressional hearing earlier this week. The representatives sent a letter to the school boards of Harvard University...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

We need to put a stop to racism being taught at our schools.

Then vote in people who will actually work toward improving things.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[rambot]

1. A primary responsibility of any government is the safety of its citizens.

2. It's a civil rights issue. A primary responsibility of the American government, which places a high value on equality, is to ensure that people are treated equally.

3. A nation which in my father's lifetime had to fight a deadly war against Nazi ideology has a legitimate concern about a sudden outpouring of neo-Nazis onto our streets and college campuses.

Strange that Republicans are so very very quiet when ACTUAL neonazis are wondering around the US these days. This has been happenning with FAR greater frequency since a certain President that they love, was in power. But strangely, it's indirect comments from university presidents that get their own thread while the (near daily?) marches barely get a comment on? What a strange set of priorities....when men march with the obvious purpose to intimidate their targets
Neo-Nazi groups spew hate outside Disney World and near Orlando, officials say

There is evidence in the FBI that far right violence that targets minorities and jews. They've been saying such things for several years but they keep getting ignored, downplayed, or terrible efforts to equate it with far left threats. And then a uni president speaks and we better shut them up and fire them.

And the neonazis in the streets with their swastikas on their arm bands and their masks over the faces...nobody is asking for THEM to be fired. I don't understand.

 

[Chesterton]

I'm not interested in "your" Ivy League. I've never even been in any of the towns with those universities. (or about half of those states). Don't try to anchor them to non-Ivy Leaguers.

No clue. No clue what you just said. Plus why is your hand inside your jacket? You think you're Napoleon Bonaparte or something?