Originally posted by Robtard
But-t-t-t you've complained how all some people do is post negatives about Trump. Isn't that like keeping track of another's posting habits and whining about it?Let me guess, it's different when you do it cos reasons.
Did I whine about how many posts they make per day? Quote it. Quote an actual adult whining about that here. Not a child, a grown up. Go for it.
Originally posted by NewGuy01
Speech is violent, we will not be silent!
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.
Originally posted by Robtard
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?
Have I ever whined about the number of posts per day, yes or no?
Originally posted by Sable
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 at generation are the ones to be blamed, but these kids don't realize it.
I just just loved the Q and A they had. How some students attempted "gotcha" questions and got utterly and completely shut down.
How they are now whining and saying the police "got out of line" there. Which in Berkeley speak means the cops actually grew some nuts and did their jobs.
A jewish man wearing a Yamaka triggered them and caused them to call him a white supremacist lol.
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.
Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]To bad on College Campuses in the U.S now you aren't allowd to have a different set of Values or Opinions. You MUST Adhere to Leftist Fascist Dogma. That is the Law of the Campuses!!!!!! [/B]
Have you been in college? Or education after high school? I graduated with a 2.7 out of h.s.
Lol...an article from some professor at Berkeley about Ben:
The Great Wall of UC Berkeley vs. Baby Face Shapiro
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. "
Indeed. Indeed.
"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.
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?