But-t-t-t you've complained how some people do nothing but post negatives about Trump here, that is whining about another poster's posting habits. So it seems you're really doing another "it's okay when I do it" maneuver.
Do you deny you've said this about people posting about Trump?
lol indeed Berkeley has lost its luster as the free speech capital it once used to be.
Its odd how much Obama changed that generation, whiney snowflake kids addicted to social media and twitter, most of these people don't have jobs when they graduate, end up back at home and mom and pops house working at Starbucks, who encourages them to protest and even gives them time off to do so.
The people that ****ed that generation are the ones to be blamed, but these kids don't realize it.
Last edited by Sable on Sep 19th, 2017 at 11:12 PM
I like Ben Shapiro. He seems to share some of the values I do. Definitely not all of them, but mostly the ones I find important. The oooo'ing and aaaaah'ing for him is...annoying, though. I wish in his Q&A's he would shush his supporters so he can finish his points. Troubles me a little.
Edit: The line between support and fanaticism, and those who bask in fanatical support, is what I'm concerned with fyi.
__________________ Listen, boy. Have you ever had your scrotum pulled off by a mountain goat and seen him sell it on eBay a day later?
Last edited by meep-meep on Sep 19th, 2017 at 11:42 PM
It's over a week old, but I read the entire article and just wow lol. Some highlights:
"It is unbelievable that our university — and can we still call it ‘our’ university when there is no shared governance in these decision — is putting up obstructions, temporary walls but walls all the same to close down the very center of the student free speech arena. Not only is this ridiculous, overkill, it is insulting to our student body and an unintentional dog whistle to our students to riot. The majority of our students have no idea who Shapiro is, but they know or will know as soon as the barricades go up, that he is a very dangerous, extremely controversial, physical threat them. "
"And, we absolutely do not have to accept every single ‘hate man’ or woman who wants to the right to demean, dehumanize , threaten, provoke and upend our primary university mission as seekers of truth and guardians of intellectual freedom. The first amendment is a work in progress. It evolves, there can be and have been amendments."
A work in progress. I like that.
"Beyond that, hate speech harms people; there is no doubt about it. “Words are deeds”, according to Wittgenstein. J. L. Austin (1975) and John R. Searle (1970) wrote books and essays on speech act theory. They identified “performative utterances “ and “illocutionary acts” that only assert facts or values but that actually bring about some new state of affairs.
Hate speech can make people hate themselves, it can make one want to crawl into a corner and disappear. It can makes one wish one was dead or worse had never been born, the ultimate existential black hole. Hate speech is a speech act that can harm the central nervous system, it can result in PTSD, and when used by police and jailers to humiliate prisoners hate speech is psychological torture, a civil rights and human rights violation. In short, Hate speech is an act of violence. The First Amendment is ignorant of the vast research on these topics by medical anthropologists, clinical psychologists, and neurological scientists."
Hate speech can result in PTSD. Stupid 1st amendment being ignorant to the research of neurological scientists.
__________________ But we all got a Chicken-Duck-Woman thing waiting for us.
Well, at the least the schmuck who wrote that has the decency to not beat around the bush and plainly states that the 1st amendment sucks, and that words are apparently physical acts. And if your opinions make someone feel like crawling into a hole and disappearing, I assume you should be thrown in jail?
__________________ And from the ashes he rose, like a black cloud. The Sin of one became the Sin of many.