zappaisgod said:

I am a pretty decent marksman and I'm sure professor is deathly afraid of guns.  How about I challenge him to a Hamilton/Burr type duel? 

Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.  Like this liberal cunt.

http://www.abc17news.com/news/mu-professor-charged-for-actions-during-campus-unrest/37583826

---

your analogy fails to present situational equality. meaning that a boxing round is surely different than a gun duel, which also isn't as legal either. It is entirely different then what the over reaction represents.

I'd agree w your opinion of physical violence and agree that no one should be blocking the press.

airclay said:

First, what a mudslinging shit fest of an article that is. Then I'd like to point out that no one is threatening real violence, it's really an open invitation for any of the above posters who were being verbally threatening to join a sanctioned fight, very big difference in intent. I think it's dumb but I also recognize a difference in the actual intent than the threat of violent attack your article frames it as.

I actually think Shapiro is a bigot and p ignorant, parroting old standpoints with a 2010's wrapper, if the university is public then I'd fully support a non-invasive protest here. I think it not only allows for free speech for all but is the smarter strategic move here.

I guess tho you guys can talk for me, y'all seem to have it pretty figured out.

---

airclay said:

Unless you whole heartedly disagree with his stances and in which point some feel a civic responsibility to speak up, specifically when race is involved. I understand that you disagree with the students and I would agree that pluralism is the best approach to forming your own ideas, however, I find it incredibly hypocritical to demean others for using their respective free speech tools while at the same time demanding it for those you agree with. which is the entire point of this "article" and thread.

---

The students are using their free speech to try to censor Shapiro's!!

I don't care that they are saying Shapiro is wrong or even a bigot, but don't try to stop him from speaking on campus like they're trying to do, can you see the difference?

For a bunch of "open-minded" free spirits, they sure seem to quickly try and shut down ideas they deem offensive.

qman said:

The students are using their free speech to try to censor Shapiro's!!

I don't care that they are saying Shapiro is wrong or even a bigot, but don't try to stop him from speaking on campus like they're trying to do, can you see the difference?

For a bunch of "open-minded" free spirits, they sure seem to quickly try and shut down ideas they deem offensive.

---

airclay said:

qman said:

The students are using their free speech to try to censor Shapiro's!!

I don't care that they are saying Shapiro is wrong or even a bigot, but don't try to stop him from speaking on campus like they're trying to do, can you see the difference?

For a bunch of "open-minded" free spirits, they sure seem to quickly try and shut down ideas they deem offensive.

---

Do you not agree that the students have the right to freedom in speech to say how they feel about, or even petition if they deem necessary, individuals speaking at the school they attend and fund?

---

It seems like you want the students to exercise their free speech to censor a second party free speech rights, that's ethically and morally wrong.

Do they have the right to protest and petition?  Yes, but if you can't see the massive hypocrisy to that line of reasoning you're no intellectually advanced than those immature students.

Shapiro is harmless, he's a Jewish 32 year old man who's highly educated and very articulate. Hell, he's not much older then the students themselves.

You do realize that trying to stop him from speaking only confirms his past arguments on the insane PC movement on college campuses?

Quote:

It seems like you want the students to exercise their free speech to censor a second party free speech rights

---

airclay said:

First, what a mudslinging shit fest of an article that is. Then I'd like to point out that no one is threatening real violence, it's really an open invitation for any of the above posters who were being verbally threatening to join a sanctioned fight, very big difference in intent.

---

airclay said:

I realize that it may make sense to you or others that hold your opinions but that doesn't necessitate the same for other's. Others may feel stronger about what he's saying being a personal antagonist. You're entitled to hold an opinion and to use the tools available to spread them, but so is everyone else. This argument that you shouldn't speak out/petition about a speaker you're unhappy with your organization giving the podium is really stifling to free speech in general (especially in the debasing manner demonstrated in that "article"). I see a confirmation bias and a failure to recognize the two way road you're on here,

Quote:

It seems like you want the students to exercise their free speech to censor a second party free speech rights

---

and as I alluded above it seems you're pushing for the opposite; "you want the students to censor themselves to allow a second party complete and unadulterated free speech"

You're right I want the students to exercise their speech, I want them to protest shapiro but, (as I've supported the whole of this thread) I want the shapiro supporters to use the same tools. I want the university to accept both petitions and allow the students to choose for themselves.

---

airclay said:

You're just rephrasing the same statement loaded w your own confirmation bias. Ok. Cool.

---

You clearly advocate protesting to promote the censorship of certain speakers, I don't.