I didn't read it all but it looks like some whiny people complained so they canceled the event.
If the people in charge, adults with jobs, are caving to the demands of screaming teenagers every time they complain about something, they're doing a terrible job.
If a kid cries for his toy and you give it to him every time, he learns crying gets what he wants. The same as training a dog. If the administration does the same thing at universities they might as well not even pretend to host events and solely focus on doing whatever the loudest whiners want.
Because it looks like that's what they're doing anyways, they're just jumping through hoops to get there and imo looks even worse that they cave every time instead of just admitting they perceive their jobs to be doing whatever the loudest whiner wants from the get-go. It would save them a lot of time at least.
And yes, having the speech cancelled is a violation of the ideal of free speech
No its not
Not unless its the goverment or the police saying she cant speak
Right, so if McDonalds legal team slaps an injunction on a citizen stopping them talking about a case of food poisoning, it's not a free speech violation.
Oh honey, it was a fucking protest, not an assassination attempt
Nah this nonsense mocking "freeze peach" complete with "ackshually it just means the govt can't fuck w/ u, anyone else can do what they want, plus didja know yuropoors don't have this retarded American obsession w/ freeze peaches and they're doing great!!! :smug:smug:smug:smug" has been around for ages. It's definitely gotten more mainstream in the last couple of years tho
Huh, I didn't know it predated that. Funnily enough though, if you click on linked article in the r/Canada OP, the author calls the faculty who are supporting banning controversial speakers "cultural marxists." I know that predates GG as well but it's some amusing symmetry.
Because the left and the right have for some reason switched places on this issue.
Instead of some religious soccer mom trying to ban a video game for violence its some neon-hair feminist (another kind of religion) trying to ban a video game for sexism.
There is a distinction that people are mixed up on:
If the American government stops you speech, that is a 1st Amendment violation. No one but the American government can violate the 1st Amendment.
Separately from that, free speech as a principle is larger than just the 1st Amendment. Private companies or this website can legally ban you or kick you off of their property if you say something they don't like. That does not violate your Constitutional rights. But it could still be shitty even if it is technically legal.
Yeah I get that. But it doesn't make any sense to say "Only the government can't stop your speech anyone else can, I can punch you until you shut up since I'm not the government! QED bro!"
Like I said, no you can't that's still a crime. It doesn't make any sense.
I'm not even talking about the other distinction, I'm talking about how they somehow think they're suddenly allowed to assault people and commit other crimes to stop speech now since they're not the government. It's got a very sovereign citizen-y feel to it.
Sovereign citizens can make citizens arrests of disruptive events, with angry mobs of neighborhood self policing and self moderation. Why do you hate freedom, Johnny? Why?
You technically have the right to free speech but FYI if you exercise that right then my organization will instigate a riot, which means ultimately you're a threat to public order.
22 comments
n/a SnapshillBot 2017-03-25
Cool story, bro
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
n/a Wacnews_the_White 2017-03-25
That attorney has some real Moxy.
n/a saint2e 2017-03-25
I understood that reference.
n/a Wacnews_the_White 2017-03-25
We are both WWII tier old :(
n/a saint2e 2017-03-25
You might even say we're Stuck in the 90s.
n/a Wacnews_the_White 2017-03-25
Those were the years I first Fell In Love.
n/a JohnnyLargeCock 2017-03-25
I didn't read it all but it looks like some whiny people complained so they canceled the event.
If the people in charge, adults with jobs, are caving to the demands of screaming teenagers every time they complain about something, they're doing a terrible job.
If a kid cries for his toy and you give it to him every time, he learns crying gets what he wants. The same as training a dog. If the administration does the same thing at universities they might as well not even pretend to host events and solely focus on doing whatever the loudest whiners want.
Because it looks like that's what they're doing anyways, they're just jumping through hoops to get there and imo looks even worse that they cave every time instead of just admitting they perceive their jobs to be doing whatever the loudest whiner wants from the get-go. It would save them a lot of time at least.
n/a freet0 2017-03-25
a fucking LEAF
n/a double-happiness 2017-03-25
Right, so if McDonalds legal team slaps an injunction on a citizen stopping them talking about a case of food poisoning, it's not a free speech violation.
I didn't really like that bit either.
n/a CaliggyJack 2017-03-25
Doesn't tag lolcows
SMH
n/a JohnnyLargeCock 2017-03-25
This new meme of "free speech only means the government can stop you" is weird. Where did they get this from?
I mean specifically with all the antifa drama that has been coming up.
"We can punch you for your speech, free speech only means the government can't punch you!"
Uh, no it doesn't bro. It's still assault and battery.
I've never understood this line of reasoning.
n/a Wacnews_the_White 2017-03-25
It came from GamerGate, no joke.
n/a The_Reason_Trump_Won 2017-03-25
Nah this nonsense mocking "freeze peach" complete with "ackshually it just means the govt can't fuck w/ u, anyone else can do what they want, plus didja know yuropoors don't have this retarded American obsession w/ freeze peaches and they're doing great!!! :smug:smug:smug:smug" has been around for ages. It's definitely gotten more mainstream in the last couple of years tho
n/a Wacnews_the_White 2017-03-25
Huh, I didn't know it predated that. Funnily enough though, if you click on linked article in the r/Canada OP, the author calls the faculty who are supporting banning controversial speakers "cultural marxists." I know that predates GG as well but it's some amusing symmetry.
n/a Dial_A_Dragon 2017-03-25
Because the left and the right have for some reason switched places on this issue.
Instead of some religious soccer mom trying to ban a video game for violence its some neon-hair feminist (another kind of religion) trying to ban a video game for sexism.
n/a MounumentOfPriapus 2017-03-25
There is a distinction that people are mixed up on:
If the American government stops you speech, that is a 1st Amendment violation. No one but the American government can violate the 1st Amendment.
Separately from that, free speech as a principle is larger than just the 1st Amendment. Private companies or this website can legally ban you or kick you off of their property if you say something they don't like. That does not violate your Constitutional rights. But it could still be shitty even if it is technically legal.
n/a JohnnyLargeCock 2017-03-25
Yeah I get that. But it doesn't make any sense to say "Only the government can't stop your speech anyone else can, I can punch you until you shut up since I'm not the government! QED bro!"
Like I said, no you can't that's still a crime. It doesn't make any sense.
I'm not even talking about the other distinction, I'm talking about how they somehow think they're suddenly allowed to assault people and commit other crimes to stop speech now since they're not the government. It's got a very sovereign citizen-y feel to it.
n/a Wacnews_the_White 2017-03-25
Sovereign citizens can make citizens arrests of disruptive events, with angry mobs of neighborhood self policing and self moderation. Why do you hate freedom, Johnny? Why?
n/a JohnnyLargeCock 2017-03-25
Lol I'd love to see these two groups try to out-legalese each other.
n/a Wacnews_the_White 2017-03-25
Heheh
n/a UmmahSultan 2017-03-25
You technically have the right to free speech but FYI if you exercise that right then my organization will instigate a riot, which means ultimately you're a threat to public order.
n/a FrostBittenSalsa 2017-03-25
No, we didn't, back to the corner with you!