Trump's newest tweet is really scary

[smilesammich 10,727]

7 minutes ago, JayJayH said:

 

 

Fine, fine, fine lol. They're terrible, I'm out voted.

 

When colleges start to have "free speech zones", you know there's a problem. This isn't a conservative problem. This is a problem of the far left, intended to shield people deemed by others to be "marginalized."

 

I fully support anyone's right to defend their gender, religion and their personal right to free speech. I also fully support anyone's right to scrutinize the living daylights out of anyone's religion or gender identity. (If you identify as male on Tuesday, female on Thursday, somewhere in between on Saturday and none of the above on Monday that is).

 

We can agree that incitement of hatred based on anything does not belong on college campuses. But "incitement of hatred" to some, is quite the contrary to others.

For example, is it "hate" if an art student draws Mohammed for an art project?

Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the idea of cultural appropriation?

Is it "hate" if a speaker argues against Black Lives Matter?

Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the notion of a gender wage gap? 

 

Where do you draw the line?

these 'zones' started more as a way to keep the majority from harassing women, gays and racial minorities, etc. they're not new and colleges haven't suddenly, upon the appearance of millennials, started crafting these rules to appease liberals. lets get that straight first.

 

no, you do not get to scrutinize an individual's gender. and no, you do not get to scrutinize an individual's religion. that is, harassment. not sure why you think that's ok.

 

well first, i think you need to focus on if you're speaking about a non affiliated guest speaker or a student or a professor. then focus on the setting, is it a class? a rally? a paid speaking engagement?

 

seems like you want a black and white response, very cut and dry. that just isn't ever going to happen in a country of 308 million differing opinions. that's why protest is so important, so we have a means to shut people up who are full of it.

 

[smilesammich 10,727]

oh well, how do you know that's a professor oriz? and do you think that a you tube channel created by the very official sounding naaap, lol - the national association for the advancement of all people, might want to have some actual source posted alongside a video that is said to prove such a massive statement as 'liberal college noodlebrain thugs the line is drawn whenever someone has a different opinion than theirs.' i mean, without context or even the name of the university this 'professor' works for - you picked a pretty bad example to prove your point.

 

want more videos from the naaap? they don't look to official, but i can see a pattern..

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeAkHp7j19VKIlE0hUrO7kA

[verneforchat 139]

39 minutes ago, JayJayH said:

 

 

Fine, fine, fine lol. They're terrible, I'm out voted.

 

When colleges start to have "free speech zones", you know there's a problem. This isn't a conservative problem. This is a problem of the far left, intended to shield people deemed by others to be "marginalized."

 

I fully support anyone's right to defend their gender, religion and their personal right to free speech. I also fully support anyone's right to scrutinize the living daylights out of anyone's religion or gender identity. (If you identify as male on Tuesday, female on Thursday, somewhere in between on Saturday and none of the above on Monday that is).

 

We can agree that incitement of hatred based on anything does not belong on college campuses. But "incitement of hatred" to some, is quite the contrary to others.

For example, is it "hate" if an art student draws Mohammed for an art project?

Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the idea of cultural appropriation?

Is it "hate" if a speaker argues against Black Lives Matter?

Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the notion of a gender wage gap? 

 

Where do you draw the line?

Dissent, criticism and inciting hate are three different things.

Scrutinizing a religion, or some points of the religion is not hate speech. Asking people to hate people of a particular religion is hate speech.

 

Its like comparing apples to oranges. 

 

 

For example, is it "hate" if an art student draws Mohammed for an art project? No one terms this hate except extremists. Who then incite violence based on it. 

Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the idea of cultural appropriation? This is dissent or disagreement, not hate. 

Is it "hate" if a speaker argues against Black Lives Matter? Again dissent or disagreement, not hate. If the propagate and influence their students to hate on BLM or blacks purely on the basis of their race, that is hate.

Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the notion of a gender wage gap? Again dissent or disagreement, not hate. If they can explain why they object in a rational manner, without resorting to saying 'but WIMEN' then i would still say it is slightly sexist, but still not hate speech.

 

If I, as a liberal, can understand the difference between dissent, criticism and actual hate speech, why do so wrongly believe that other liberals cannot? Or if conservatives cannot?

 

Why are you so hellbent on proving that all liberals or the left HATE anyone who disagrees with what we believe in? Hate is a very strong word.

Edited February 6, 2017 by verneforchat

[verneforchat 139]

13 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

oh well, how do you know that's a professor oriz? and do you think that a you tube channel created by the very official sounding naaap, lol - the national association for the advancement of all people, might want to have some actual source posted alongside a video that is said to prove such a massive statement as 'liberal college noodlebrain thugs the line is drawn whenever someone has a different opinion than theirs.' i mean, without context or even the name of the university this 'professor' works for - you picked a pretty bad example to prove your point.

 

want more videos from the naaap? they don't look to official, but i can see a pattern.

 

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeAkHp7j19VKIlE0hUrO7kA

Very easy to verify if that is a professor or not in NYU. Simply go to NYu website and see if they are on the faculty page.

 

Until then, it can be a shawarma cart dealer for all I know.

Edited February 6, 2017 by verneforchat

[Merle 458]

59 minutes ago, OriZ said:

According to the liberal college noodlebrain thugs the line is drawn whenever someone has a different opinion than theirs. Then it's riot time, and time to call everyone sexist, mysogynist, homophobe, islammohobe, and all these other words there's so many of them I don't remember all of what we're even supposed to be called anymore lol

 

See this noodlebrain professor losing her mind? We're in good hands yo.

 

 

From what I've read she's a "lobster porn artist" but she might as well be a professor. 

[eieio 1,594]

Quote

so we have a means to shut people up who are full of it.

 

 

There you go…..defending the 1st amendment

 

Hate speech defined by liberals is pretty much……whatever they disagree with.  

[verneforchat 139]

19 minutes ago, Merle said:

From what I've read she's a "lobster porn artist" but she might as well be a professor. 

What kind of university did you go to have such professors?

[verneforchat 139]

19 minutes ago, eieio said:

 

 

There you go…..defending the 1st amendment

 

Hate speech defined by liberals is pretty much……whatever they disagree with.  

 

You keep misunderstanding the 1st amendment. Here it is again in English:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

Sorry I don't have a Ukranian/Russian version, perhaps it may help you understand it better?

Edited February 6, 2017 by verneforchat

[eieio 1,594]

3 minutes ago, verneforchat said:

 

You keep misunderstanding the 1st amendment. Here it is again in English:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

Sorry I don't have a Ukranian/Russian version, perhaps it may help you understand it better?

Ohhh thank you..I had no idea. You are the best!

[verneforchat 139]

Just now, eieio said:

Ohhh thank you..I had no idea. You are the best!

welcome comrade!

[OriZ 3,157]

1 hour ago, Merle said:

From what I've read she's a "lobster porn artist" but she might as well be a professor. 

Yup, same thing.

[OriZ 3,157]

2 hours ago, smilesammich said:

oh well, how do you know that's a professor oriz? and do you think that a you tube channel created by the very official sounding naaap, lol - the national association for the advancement of all people, might want to have some actual source posted alongside a video that is said to prove such a massive statement as 'liberal college noodlebrain thugs the line is drawn whenever someone has a different opinion than theirs.' i mean, without context or even the name of the university this 'professor' works for - you picked a pretty bad example to prove your point.

 

want more videos from the naaap? they don't look to official, but i can see a pattern..

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeAkHp7j19VKIlE0hUrO7kA

I found the video on youtube but rest assured I saw it long before - I just wanted to post a video, not a link with words and then a video. I meant to say "professor" because that's what she claims she was, I just didn't " it in the end. It doesn't matter, the point is we keep seeing this kind of behaviour, and it's asinine. Protest is ok, but violence and losing your mind is not, and I don't care who you're trying to shut up. I personally think she's much worse than anybody they've tried to shut up. That's no way to act.

 

BTW I believe that was from the NYU protest the other day. I didn't even look to see what the channel was and didn't care because like I said, the video's been all over the place already. And I don't need a source to call many of today's college kids(in this case I was talking about the majority of rioters, not about the staff) noodlebrain thugs, it's an opinion, not somthing that needs to be proven.

[OriZ 3,157]

2 hours ago, verneforchat said:

Dissent, criticism and inciting hate are three different things.

Scrutinizing a religion, or some points of the religion is not hate speech. Asking people to hate people of a particular religion is hate speech.

 

Its like comparing apples to oranges. 

 

 

For example, is it "hate" if an art student draws Mohammed for an art project? No one terms this hate except extremists. Who then incite violence based on it. 

Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the idea of cultural appropriation? This is dissent or disagreement, not hate. 

Is it "hate" if a speaker argues against Black Lives Matter? Again dissent or disagreement, not hate. If the propagate and influence their students to hate on BLM or blacks purely on the basis of their race, that is hate.

Is it "hate" if a professor objects to the notion of a gender wage gap? Again dissent or disagreement, not hate. If they can explain why they object in a rational manner, without resorting to saying 'but WIMEN' then i would still say it is slightly sexist, but still not hate speech.

 

If I, as a liberal, can understand the difference between dissent, criticism and actual hate speech, why do so wrongly believe that other liberals cannot? Or if conservatives cannot?

 

Why are you so hellbent on proving that all liberals or the left HATE anyone who disagrees with what we believe in? Hate is a very strong word.

 

Because they prove it on an almost daily basis, glad you can understand the difference though, more power to you.

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 hour ago, eieio said:

 

 

There you go…..defending the 1st amendment

 

 

protest? correct.  

[bcking 3,157]

1 hour ago, eieio said:

Ohhh thank you..I had no idea. You are the best!

Given the example you provided when I asked, you clearly did need an explanation. Glad you learned something.