In the wake of the brutal Hamas massacre, there have been calls to silence grotesque speech against our community. It’s understandable. But it’s wrong.
I completely agree about free speech absolutism, but is is very hard to extend this to people who don’t believe in free speech at all. We extend free speech in the direction of speech we find abhorrent, they on the other hand will end you for a perceived micro aggression. We need to do a better job of ensuring an even playing field. Free speech for all.
I completely agree with you that absent imminent threat of violence, government may not attempt to suppress or control speech.
On the other hand, I believe that people should experience the consequences of their speech. If this means losing your job offer or being shunned by people appalled by your speech, that is perfectly appropriate and correct.
Furthermore, while foreign nationals have a protected right of speech while in the United States, they do not have a protected right to be here. There are here at our pleasure, and that privilege can and should be revoked if we believe that they detract from, rather than add to, our society. We owe them nothing.
As of 2021, 35 states have passed bills and executive orders designed to discourage boycotts of Israel.[4] Many of them have been passed with broad bipartisan support.[5] Most anti-BDS laws have taken one of two forms: contract-focused laws requiring government contractors to promise that they are not boycotting Israel; and investment-focused laws, mandating public investment funds to avoid entities boycotting Israel.[6] There has been debate over whether the laws violate the right to free speech and organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Council on American–Islamic Relations (CAIR) have challenged many of them in court cases.[7]
With all due respect, there is only so much time in a day, only so much energy given to any one individual, only so much length to our lives, and right now, with the lives of Israelis and Jews around the world very much hanging in the balance, if I have any time or energy or money to give, it is and will be to defending those lives and not the "rights" of hate-filled ideologues, idiots who think they are intellectuals, and simple garden-variety would-be murderers to voice their beliefs. Terrorist attacks and wars have an awfully clarifying effect sometimes. You end up having to figure out just what the heck you are going to DO, if anything, about the horror in front of you. Right now, worrying about whether some spoiled and pampered student gets to spout off while carrying a poster with a Hamas terrorist flying into a peace dance party to kill Jews is just not one of them.
I disagree with part of this: the free speech on campus and organizations.
I'm a liberal Democrat my entire life but didn't buy into the whole gender ideology of men in women's safe spaces and sports. For that, I've been called a TERF, N*zi, Trumper, bigot, have had death threats and pictures of guns sent to me and can't speak out because my field is totally captured by it. I would definitely lose jobs. If I went to my alma mater with a sign saying "Let women speak," I would likely be physically attacked. Cancel culture and worse is alive and well on college campuses and in far Left institutions.
Screaming slogans that mean the destruction of Israel, blaming babies for their own deaths and tearing down posters of kidnapped kids are actions and ideas that most employers don't want to be seen as representative of that company. If I had a business, I would not hire these people. Why should I have to?
(and am I the only one noticing the overlap of those saying "punch TERFs in the face" and "from the river to the sea"?? I don't think so.
Free speech must be upheld on both sides of an argument. Understanding people's thoughts and feelings is valuable. However, this belief is no longer considered inviolable. Both US political parties often seek to hinder it. Nevertheless, when free speech flourishes, as it does across US campuses, we can discern the genuine abyss of knowledge in its utterance. It is imperative for more individuals to actively engage in contemporary debates on topics such as poverty, immigration, and the increasing calls for isolationism. Yet, solid arguments can falter due to our limited comprehension of civics, our nation's founders, and the principles of liberalism. There is a significant gap in the dissemination of this knowledge in most of our educational institutions. To the founders and contributors of the Free Press, a profound and heartfelt thank you. As someone who tends to align with the middle-right on political matters, I remain eager to hear others' well-reasoned opinions, not solely driven by passion. I can and will change my mind. Your dedication and the myriad of contributors represent the best of journalism integrity.
Jefferson: “ If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated, where reason is left free to combat it.”
The last eight words comprise the essential component of free discourse. Without that freedom there can’t even be science.
So does anti Black, Immigrant, Muslim, India, and especially anti inner city Black crime and others get free speech. Maybe you are off base and that’s not the way it really works. Try criticizing Floyd a career criminal or lack of family values for certain ethnic minorities and watch the shit show crying from the woke crowd. Saying something doesn’t make it true.
So kids who need micro aggression warnings, told us silence is violence, got professors fired and speakers cancelled and that boys can be girls now want free speech because that way they can literally advocate genocide?
What a bizarre, vapid, ignorant and negative net value generation.
Agree that hate speech should be protected, but that should not stop universities from unequivocally condemning it as such and universities should not be compelled to extend funding or any other university resources for groups that engage in it.
The beauty of the First Amendment and free speech and the freedom of the press is that it allows idiots to show their true colors. Once you've destroyed your reputation, you're done.
Ask Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Trump, Jim Jordan, Kevin McCarthy and the Squad.
"In addition, speakers may not issue “true threats”—speech that directly targets specific individuals with hateful, violent rhetoric, intending to instill a reasonable fear that the targeted individuals will be subject to violence."
.... Somewhat off topic, but would an example of prohibited speech be something like, “I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price! You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions!”?
What should the punishment be for such hateful, threatening, irresponsible speech?
Though, I do think that citizens of other nations, here as our guests. should decide for themselves and of their own volition to get the hell out if they wish to directly support a terrorist organization and or hate our fellow citizens for their inborn religion/ ethnicity.
How very generous of you, to say that "even the antisemites deserve free speech." Wow, that's mighty white of you.
I completely agree about free speech absolutism, but is is very hard to extend this to people who don’t believe in free speech at all. We extend free speech in the direction of speech we find abhorrent, they on the other hand will end you for a perceived micro aggression. We need to do a better job of ensuring an even playing field. Free speech for all.
I completely agree with you that absent imminent threat of violence, government may not attempt to suppress or control speech.
On the other hand, I believe that people should experience the consequences of their speech. If this means losing your job offer or being shunned by people appalled by your speech, that is perfectly appropriate and correct.
Furthermore, while foreign nationals have a protected right of speech while in the United States, they do not have a protected right to be here. There are here at our pleasure, and that privilege can and should be revoked if we believe that they detract from, rather than add to, our society. We owe them nothing.
As of 2021, 35 states have passed bills and executive orders designed to discourage boycotts of Israel.[4] Many of them have been passed with broad bipartisan support.[5] Most anti-BDS laws have taken one of two forms: contract-focused laws requiring government contractors to promise that they are not boycotting Israel; and investment-focused laws, mandating public investment funds to avoid entities boycotting Israel.[6] There has been debate over whether the laws violate the right to free speech and organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Council on American–Islamic Relations (CAIR) have challenged many of them in court cases.[7]
With all due respect, there is only so much time in a day, only so much energy given to any one individual, only so much length to our lives, and right now, with the lives of Israelis and Jews around the world very much hanging in the balance, if I have any time or energy or money to give, it is and will be to defending those lives and not the "rights" of hate-filled ideologues, idiots who think they are intellectuals, and simple garden-variety would-be murderers to voice their beliefs. Terrorist attacks and wars have an awfully clarifying effect sometimes. You end up having to figure out just what the heck you are going to DO, if anything, about the horror in front of you. Right now, worrying about whether some spoiled and pampered student gets to spout off while carrying a poster with a Hamas terrorist flying into a peace dance party to kill Jews is just not one of them.
I disagree with part of this: the free speech on campus and organizations.
I'm a liberal Democrat my entire life but didn't buy into the whole gender ideology of men in women's safe spaces and sports. For that, I've been called a TERF, N*zi, Trumper, bigot, have had death threats and pictures of guns sent to me and can't speak out because my field is totally captured by it. I would definitely lose jobs. If I went to my alma mater with a sign saying "Let women speak," I would likely be physically attacked. Cancel culture and worse is alive and well on college campuses and in far Left institutions.
Screaming slogans that mean the destruction of Israel, blaming babies for their own deaths and tearing down posters of kidnapped kids are actions and ideas that most employers don't want to be seen as representative of that company. If I had a business, I would not hire these people. Why should I have to?
(and am I the only one noticing the overlap of those saying "punch TERFs in the face" and "from the river to the sea"?? I don't think so.
Free speech must be upheld on both sides of an argument. Understanding people's thoughts and feelings is valuable. However, this belief is no longer considered inviolable. Both US political parties often seek to hinder it. Nevertheless, when free speech flourishes, as it does across US campuses, we can discern the genuine abyss of knowledge in its utterance. It is imperative for more individuals to actively engage in contemporary debates on topics such as poverty, immigration, and the increasing calls for isolationism. Yet, solid arguments can falter due to our limited comprehension of civics, our nation's founders, and the principles of liberalism. There is a significant gap in the dissemination of this knowledge in most of our educational institutions. To the founders and contributors of the Free Press, a profound and heartfelt thank you. As someone who tends to align with the middle-right on political matters, I remain eager to hear others' well-reasoned opinions, not solely driven by passion. I can and will change my mind. Your dedication and the myriad of contributors represent the best of journalism integrity.
Jefferson: “ If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated, where reason is left free to combat it.”
The last eight words comprise the essential component of free discourse. Without that freedom there can’t even be science.
So does anti Black, Immigrant, Muslim, India, and especially anti inner city Black crime and others get free speech. Maybe you are off base and that’s not the way it really works. Try criticizing Floyd a career criminal or lack of family values for certain ethnic minorities and watch the shit show crying from the woke crowd. Saying something doesn’t make it true.
So kids who need micro aggression warnings, told us silence is violence, got professors fired and speakers cancelled and that boys can be girls now want free speech because that way they can literally advocate genocide?
What a bizarre, vapid, ignorant and negative net value generation.
Agree that hate speech should be protected, but that should not stop universities from unequivocally condemning it as such and universities should not be compelled to extend funding or any other university resources for groups that engage in it.
They’re not. And neither are the modern feminists. Publicly BLM and Ilhan Omar showed support for killing of Jews. And that is important by itself.
All the progressives complaining: "I thought you conservatives were against cancel culture!" are essentially saying: "How dare you hit me back?!"
Well. They’ve got it coming.
Who was Samantha Woll and what exactly happened?
The beauty of the First Amendment and free speech and the freedom of the press is that it allows idiots to show their true colors. Once you've destroyed your reputation, you're done.
Ask Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Trump, Jim Jordan, Kevin McCarthy and the Squad.
"In addition, speakers may not issue “true threats”—speech that directly targets specific individuals with hateful, violent rhetoric, intending to instill a reasonable fear that the targeted individuals will be subject to violence."
.... Somewhat off topic, but would an example of prohibited speech be something like, “I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price! You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions!”?
What should the punishment be for such hateful, threatening, irresponsible speech?
This!
Though, I do think that citizens of other nations, here as our guests. should decide for themselves and of their own volition to get the hell out if they wish to directly support a terrorist organization and or hate our fellow citizens for their inborn religion/ ethnicity.