Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox
Thanks for the discussion.
Ann Coulter, and those on the left, and others closer to the middle, whether George Will types or whatever, do this type of speaking all the time. Both sides should be allowed to speak with a monopolized microphone from time to time. Are you saying that because she has a microphone, and can control the forum, she doesn't have free speech rights?
Of course she has free speech rights, but what she doesn't have is the right to restrict other's rights. That's how this works, for better or worse. If personA wants to stand on a stage in a theater and monopolize the microphone, then personB has the right to stand outside the theater with a bullhorn and scream bloody murder to voice my dissent.
But that's putting the cart before the horse. There's this fantasyland meme going around that people like Coulter don't have a platform. She's written, like, a ****load of books, and people don't want them burned and her arrested for thoughtcrimes. Voicing dissent through protest isn't really even in the realm of a 'free speech' issue.
It's like, of course Coulter has free speech, people have heard the speech, and that's why they're protesting! They're not stopping her free speech, they're saying, yeah, we disagree with what she's saying because she already said it! The whole meme is based on mixing up the causality.
Quote:
Look at it from the flip side, what if she was a left leaning speaker and right leaning violent protestors were stopping her?
It's the same thing. If a bunch of right-leaning people protested, we'd mark it down as counterpoint, those protesters don't agree with the speaker.
Last edited by 5ive; 04-26-2017 at 01:09 AM.