• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump signs executive order to promote free speech on college campuses

pamak said:
The woman was to be hired as an independent contractor (speech pathologist) for a school district in Texas. The idea that she could make comments in her personal facebook or whatever supporting an Israeli boycott without expecting any consequence as an independent contractor makes little sense. We have countless examples of how personal behavior and facebook comments outside of one's professional life can result in his termination. We also know that school districts get federal funds.
Click to expand...

Did you read the article I posted?
 
eohrnberger said:
I don't recall anyone supporting these extremist nut jobs from every political strips, as well as those of a multitude of confused stripes in the case of the NZ shooter. So suppress those who are law abiding because someone else has done evil? Yeah, that's like the gun control regulations, isn't it?

Further, no one bothers about any of this:

Nigerian Christians Under Siege: Attacks Claim 120 Lives Since ...
https://www1.cbn.com/.../nigerian-christians-under-siege-attacks-claim-120-lives-since...
4 days ago - At least 120 people have been killed in attacks reportedly committed by the Fulani militia against Christian communities in Nigeria since ...

Syrian Christians Fear a New Genocide In Wake of US Pullout | CBN ...
https://www1.cbn.com/.../syrian-christians-fear-a-new-genocide-in-wake-of-us-pullout
Feb 1, 2019 - KOBANE, Northeast Syria – With the pullout of US troops, Christians here in northeast Syria told CBN News their future hangs in the balance. With the region on the brink of chaos, they’re fearful and warning of a new genocide. ... Now Christians fear another potential apocalypse ...

BreakPoint: Christians Die, Media Mum - Break Point
www.breakpoint.org/2019/03/breakpoint-christians-die-media-mum/
2 days ago - While Open Doors calls what is happening in the Middle Belt “religious cleansing,” Nigerian Christian leaders have called it genocide, and not ...
​

'Oh, but what's a few Christians being killed anyway? They don't nearly rank high enough on the intersectional pyramid to count or to be bothered with', apparently.



Yeah, 'What's the matter with beating a few conservatives up anyway? They don't nearly rank high enough on the intersectional pyramid to count or to be bothered with', 'infringing their free speech rights just fine', apparently.



The hypocrisy is just simply utterly amazing in its scope and depth.
The vastness of what used to be liberal and what now passes as liberal just simply utterly amazing in its scope and depth.
Click to expand...

Would you change your tune if I find proof that conservatives have focus grouped words and images that provoke liberals so conservative "activists" can go out and provoke a negative response in order to provide PR fodder?

That they went where they went not to spread their message but in hopes some liberal would act out in response to their intentionally provocative messaging?
 
Sampson Simpson said:
Denying a speaker spreading hate has nothing to do with free speech. They are not being imprisoned for their action. Why do idiots continually pull out the dumb "but free speech" when others use their free speech to be against the other people? Denying someone the right to spread hate and lies on a campus that is about teaching facts is practicing their free speech. As usual, a Trump policy is pointless and falls flat on its face

Conservatives, stop ****ing whining about your pathetic unfairness and free speech. Instead of being assholes, why don't you bring some actual facts to the table. Instead of spreading hate and lies.
Click to expand...

And who decides what qualifies as hate and lies...and why is hate something people should not be exposed to as a learning tool in University?
 
DH Kirkwood said:
I'm all for 'free speech' on campuses. Students should be exposed to all trains of though, even those that are stupid as ****. You combat 'bad' speech with facts and reason. What, pray tell, is so controverial as that.

My entire philosphy is that if my philosphy is correct, it will win.
Click to expand...

Really depends on how much money has been spent "framing" the issue at hand on the person whose philosophy you are debating.

Use any of the words or concepts included in the "frame" and you actually just reinforce the frame.

A little research on framing, focus groups etc and how they're used is a real eye opener and makes it real clear where our current divide originated.
 
Buzz62 said:
oops...
Click to expand...

I can't believe how disconnected your response is from reality. I spent over a decade on campuses around the world, and you think I'm gonna click a Fox News video and change my worldview?

How is that not an ignore?

Have you ever dealt with an educated person before? You're like a monkey slinging crap in a zoo. Wtf.
 
Sampson Simpson said:
Denying a speaker spreading hate has nothing to do with free speech. They are not being imprisoned for their action. Why do idiots continually pull out the dumb "but free speech" when others use their free speech to be against the other people? Denying someone the right to spread hate and lies on a campus that is about teaching facts is practicing their free speech. As usual, a Trump policy is pointless and falls flat on its face

Conservatives, stop ****ing whining about your pathetic unfairness and free speech. Instead of being assholes, why don't you bring some actual facts to the table. Instead of spreading hate and lies.
Click to expand...

I think what everyone is missing in this thread is that it's the right trying to say the left is limiting free speech when as we all know it's the opposite.

Trump HAS successfully "flipped" this.

I'll tell you something else. Come election time, Trump will, successfully, blame the DEms for the godawful deficit his tax cut caused and his budgets don't look to correct.

You'll see.

Trump will have the dems on the defensive.

Lot's more too. All these ridiculous chants of "free" we hear about everything are going to come back and hurt the DEms.

The Dems need to distance themselves from the Sanders of the world right now.
 
Ikari said:
Universities already allowed speakers from all walks of political orientation. So it wasn't really necessary. The real question is who is going to pay the bill for the exploding costs of security. Universities have to spend millions on security these days, ain't no chump change.
Click to expand...

The fact that security is needed to protect the speaker from violent reprisal or events are cancelled because the University can’t guarantee the physical safety of the speaker or attendees demonstrates that it is necessary.
 
DH Kirkwood said:
I'm all for 'free speech' on campuses. Students should be exposed to all trains of though, even those that are stupid as ****. You combat 'bad' speech with facts and reason. What, pray tell, is so controverial as that.

My entire philosphy is that if my philosphy is correct, it will win.
Click to expand...

Come grasshopper, listen and I will teach you.

Combating 'bad' speech with facts and reason will have no effect or drive the person to dig in harder IF what the stupid speech is what the person wants to hear.

You want proof? Look at any Trumpet that posts here. Not a one will allow facts and reason to change their love of the orange Satan.
 
Xelor said:
From the referenced article:
"Even as universities have received billions and billions of dollars from taxpayers, many have become increasingly hostile to free speech and the First Amendment," Trump said.​

If one doesn't care for a school's handling of expression among the student body and/or faculty, don't apply to go there. Nobody holds people at gunpoint and/or otherwise forces them on pain of "anything" to attend any specific college/university.

If one feels free speech matters that much:
1 -- Find out what the school's approach is.
2 -- Apply, or don't, as befits one's assessment of the matter.
Click to expand...
If universities want to promote their preferred for of bigotry they are free to do so. They are not free to use my money to pay for it. Seems fair enough to me.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
 
Ikari said:
Universities already allowed speakers from all walks of political orientation. So it wasn't really necessary. The real question is who is going to pay the bill for the exploding costs of security. Universities have to spend millions on security these days, ain't no chump change.
Click to expand...

They have? LOL, no they haven't at many schools.
 
Chomsky said:
Perhaps. But the state universities can still condemn it, they just can't stop it (unless I suspect it's illegal). Which I think is fair, in light of 1stA protection.

Private universities, even if receiving public funding, seem to still be able to write their policies as they see fit - as long as they enforce them.

I think I'm fine with this. My big concern was Trump meddling in private education, but I suspect he got legal advice in his effort this time, letting him know it would be unconstitutional to meddle in private universities' policies.
Click to expand...
This really isn't much different than title 9 or the many other things that the government attaches strings to, in order to qualify for federal funding.

The devil of course will be in the details if there is one, but not the surface I'm not seeing why this is even controversial. It protects unpopular speech which is the form of speech that needs protection.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
 
Napoleon said:
The fact that security is needed to protect the speaker from violent reprisal or events are cancelled because the University can’t guarantee the physical safety of the speaker or attendees demonstrates that it is necessary.
Click to expand...

So...let's say appropriate security cannot be set. The University must allow the event regardless?
 
ecofarm said:
I can't believe how disconnected your response is from reality. I spent over a decade on campuses around the world, and you think I'm gonna click a Fox News video and change my worldview?

How is that not an ignore?

Have you ever dealt with an educated person before? You're like a monkey slinging crap in a zoo. Wtf.
Click to expand...

I see...so that the clip came from FOX means it never happened.
I suppose Bill Mahar being banned from speaking at Berkey was...a FOX News Setup?

I deal with highly educated people every day. Educated people are so because they have a desire to KNOW things.
Which is why...you evidently don't qualify.
 
AGENT J said:
WHat are all the examples of a university factually violating free speech laws?
is this happening so often that an EO is needed?
if it is factually happening wheres all the won court cases against the people doing so?

and if it is factually happening i want action!
Click to expand...
Why does it matter if it frequently happens or rarely?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
 
Ikari said:
So...let's say appropriate security cannot be set. The University must allow the event regardless?
Click to expand...

If the University has a security problem then it needs to identify and discipline the responsible students up to and including expulsion.
 
Buzz62 said:
I see...so that the clip came from FOX means it never happened.
Click to expand...

No, that's not it. And I'm shocked by the stupidity.
 
trouble13 said:
This really isn't much different than title 9 or the many other things that the government attaches strings to, in order to qualify for federal funding.

The devil of course will be in the details if there is one, but not the surface I'm not seeing why this is even controversial. It protects unpopular speech which is the form of speech that needs protection.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Yep. Exactly. It is precisely the type of speech our forefathers imagined, when they penned the amendment.

There isn't much need to protect speech everyone likes! ;)
 
noonereal said:
Helo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

These videos are of protests!!!!!!!!!!!!

These protests are taking place because the speaks are controversial.

That the speakers are controversial but given the opportunity to speak means the first amendment is being respected.

The college is allowing the controversial speakers, the speakers are speaking and being able to say whatever they want and the protesters who have a right to protest.
Click to expand...
And due to protests by the left that got violent Universities have refused conservative speakers their 1st amendment rights to speak to speak on campus.


Any that are violent, like Trumpets get, are arrested.
Click to expand...

The police held back and did not do their jobs in the Berkley riot . And that was leftist not Trump supporters.


If something is canceled for security concerns has nothing to do with free speech. It has to do with liabilities.
Click to expand...

So the left riots and the right has their 1st amendment right to free speech taken away. That is EXACTLY what made this EO necessary.

See. There is no issue unless you are an eternal victim which we know is the glu that holds the Trumpets together, victomhood.
Click to expand...
Yeah no issue for leftist people like yourself who want to suppress free speech.

For you to submit theses videos in rebuttal means you are flawed in though. Another Trumpet trademark. Not so educated.
Click to expand...
Trying to bait me? :lol: That is the funniest thing you have said all day. You obviously do not know who you are talking to. :lol:
 
Chomsky said:
I had my concerns, until I read this:


That eased my mind, and I think this is a good thing - barring a partisan or poor implementation.

I very much believe all universities should strive to promote free speech, state universities unequivocally, but I do respect the rights of private entities to be free of government interference. On the surface, this order seems to satisfy both of my concerns. Kudos to Trump here, if he can get it implemented fairly & effectively! :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Yeah, the president isn't breaking new ground here. When you accept federal money you accept the fact that the federal money can use those dollars as leverage. We've been doing that with all sorts of federal grants to states forever.
 
ecofarm said:
No, that's not it. And I'm shocked by the stupidity.
Click to expand...

I was too. That guy punching the smaller guy in the head, while being recorded doing so, is obviously stupid.
Here...

and here...

oh and even in my hone town...


Ya...stupid people eh?
 
Last edited:
Napoleon said:
If the University has a security problem then it needs to identify and discipline the responsible students up to and including expulsion.
Click to expand...

True, students can and should be expelled if they are participating in violent "protest". But it's not just students showing up and Universities are not policing agents. So it will take a much larger effort to crack down on groups that are purposefully engaging in violence as a main tactic, beyond which a University in and of itself can supply.

In the interim, Universities DO host speakers from all different political ideologies and do spend considerable money, time, and effort to provide security. But if proper security cannot be obtained prior to an event, it may need to be rescheduled or cancelled.
 
Buzz62 said:
I was too. That guy punching the smaller guy in the head, while being recorded doing so, is obviously stupid.
Here...

and here...
YouTube
oh and even in my hone town...
YouTube

Ya...stupid people eh?
Click to expand...


You search youtube for videos of stupid people and click on them to learn something? Are you sure no one is clicking on you?
 
Chomsky said:
Yep. Exactly. It is precisely the type of speech our forefathers imagined, when they penned the amendment.

There isn't much need to protect speech everyone likes! ;)
Click to expand...
Finally an area that we can agree! I knew I liked something about you.
 
SLC said:
And due to protests by the left that got violent Universities have refused conservative speakers their 1st amendment rights to speak to speak on campus.
Click to expand...

Honest, in a logic class in college you'd flunk.

I mean that without malice.

You literally make no sense. You are confusing issues to claim victimization.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom