Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Politics version 7.0 more politics.

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-25-2017, 08:45 PM   #76
pokerodox
The Situation
 
pokerodox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: can never leave
Posts: 4,036
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive View Post
Yes of course, but that's not happening. And that's not a minor detail, THAT'S THE ENTIRE ****ING POINT.

Do you people honestly think the Coulters of the world are hosting open forum round table discussions for spirited debate with their ideological opponents? No, it's one stage and one microphone and one platform.

THE PROTESTING IS THE COUNTERARGUMENT, GIVEN THESE RESTRAINTS.

Lozl at going to a public park for public discussion. You people have no idea how any of this works.
A couple more thoughts. I am very glad to hear you say the bolded. I didn't expect that from you, nor from many on the left.

You seem focused on this park versus having a microphone in a conference room distinction. Seems like a false distinction to me. I can picture a case where this weekend the leftists get to use the park, with permit, etc. to have a leftist speak on a microphone, and no-one else with countering opinions get's to interrupt or even use the microphone afterward. Then next weekend, the rightist gets to speak with the same constraints. This is free speech. But if you prohibit one of them, based on the content of their speech, that is immoral.
pokerodox is offline  
Old 04-25-2017, 08:48 PM   #77
pokerodox
The Situation
 
pokerodox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: can never leave
Posts: 4,036
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by AllTheCheese View Post
Wrong. I'm saying you were being disingenuous trying to pretend this was about her views on the role of government, i.e. conservatism, instead of what protesters are actually angry about, which is her views on race, culture, and religion.
She has conservative views on race, culture and religion. I am fine with being more specific than just saying she is conservative. I was not trying to hide that this is about her views on race (I would say it's more that than other cultural issues or religion).

So, what are you saying? If you were just pointing out that this is about her views on race, we agree. But are you saying more? For example, do you agree that it is immoral to use violence to stop her from speaking, based on the content of her speech?
pokerodox is offline  
Old 04-25-2017, 08:50 PM   #78
AllTheCheese
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
AllTheCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sad life; won't change
Posts: 9,649
Re: Free speech

Of course. Probably every poster here agrees with that.

You have a very extreme view of the left, like every Hillary voter is out smashing windows and beating up Trump supporters. That happens, but every single one of those stories is reported in right wing media. Since you haven't seens 66 million such stories, you can safely conclude that most aren't like that.

Oddly you also seem to have an extreme view of the right, in the way you're conflating the word conservatism with bigotry.

Last edited by AllTheCheese; 04-25-2017 at 08:55 PM.
AllTheCheese is offline  
Old 04-25-2017, 08:53 PM   #79
pokerodox
The Situation
 
pokerodox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: can never leave
Posts: 4,036
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by AllTheCheese View Post
Of course. Probably every poster here agrees with that.
Interesting. If true, then I may have misjudged many on the left.

So, just to be crystal clear, you think using violence to stop Ann Coulter from expressing her views in a public forum is immoral? I'm still not sure what others on the left believe.
pokerodox is offline  
Old 04-25-2017, 08:53 PM   #80
mongidig
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,146
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic View Post
Mongi thinking Ann Coulter is beautiful clears up a LOT of things about him. She looks like if Skeletor had a sex change but replaced cartoon evil plans with just mundane idiocy.

Canada has to be the most insignificant Country in the world. Are Canadians a protected group Chez? Am I allowed to make fun of them?

Ann Coulter is hot and should be allowed to speak. If you don't believe me ask Bernie.
mongidig is offline  
Old 04-25-2017, 08:56 PM   #81
mongidig
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,146
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by AllTheCheese View Post
lol, you're a Trump supporter. Posting gaffes is not something you get to do.
This is how the Nazis got started folks!
mongidig is offline  
Old 04-25-2017, 09:00 PM   #82
AllTheCheese
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
AllTheCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sad life; won't change
Posts: 9,649
Re: Free speech

Wow dat hand wringing. Really impressive.
AllTheCheese is offline  
Old 04-25-2017, 09:35 PM   #83
pokerodox
The Situation
 
pokerodox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: can never leave
Posts: 4,036
Re: Free speech

No, let's take it the next step. You agree that it's morally wrong to stop her from speaking with violence. Now how is that morally different from the university stopping her based on the violence of the ******* violent protestors?

Did you see my response to five? The university might as well be a public park.
pokerodox is offline  
Old 04-25-2017, 09:41 PM   #84
KellyRae
journeyman
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 390
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by AllTheCheese View Post
lol, you're a Trump supporter. Posting gaffes is not something you get to do.
57 states isn't a "gaffe." And if Trump said that we'd have 10000 posts itf on it.

Hard to believe, tho. Someone tell me the footage is doctored.
KellyRae is offline  
Old 04-25-2017, 11:23 PM   #85
BroadwaySushy
veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 2,565
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by mongidig View Post
Ann Coulter is hot and should be allowed to speak. If you don't believe me ask Bernie.
Kellyanne's hotter imo.
BroadwaySushy is offline  
Old 04-25-2017, 11:27 PM   #86
batair
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
batair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: fore the rain starts
Posts: 15,199
Re: Free speech

It is odd seeing some on the right (not trump he wants to loosen libel laws, np for the right there) come to the defense of free speech given the history of the rights oppression (sometimes violent) of it my lifetime.
batair is offline  
Old 04-25-2017, 11:36 PM   #87
David Sklansky
Administrator
 
David Sklansky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 13,885
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by KellyRae View Post
57 states isn't a "gaffe."
Of course it was.
David Sklansky is offline  
Old 04-26-2017, 12:56 AM   #88
5ive
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
5ive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Harvard, in a place like Africa
Posts: 6,751
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox View Post
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.
5ive is offline  
Old 04-26-2017, 12:59 AM   #89
5ive
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
5ive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Harvard, in a place like Africa
Posts: 6,751
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox View Post
A couple more thoughts. I am very glad to hear you say the bolded. I didn't expect that from you, nor from many on the left.

You seem focused on this park versus having a microphone in a conference room distinction. Seems like a false distinction to me. I can picture a case where this weekend the leftists get to use the park, with permit, etc. to have a leftist speak on a microphone, and no-one else with countering opinions get's to interrupt or even use the microphone afterward. Then next weekend, the rightist gets to speak with the same constraints. This is free speech. But if you prohibit one of them, based on the content of their speech, that is immoral.
That sounds like a knitting circle.

But it's not a false distinction it's just a tangential issue. How are you defining 'prohibit'?
5ive is offline  
Old 04-26-2017, 01:08 AM   #90
5ive
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
5ive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Harvard, in a place like Africa
Posts: 6,751
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by mongidig View Post
Did you ever consider he is climbing out of the hole?
You have no idea what I'm talking about.
5ive is offline  
Old 04-26-2017, 01:18 AM   #91
5ive
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
5ive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Harvard, in a place like Africa
Posts: 6,751
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox View Post
No, let's take it the next step. You agree that it's morally wrong to stop her from speaking with violence. Now how is that morally different from the university stopping her based on the violence of the ******* violent protestors?

Did you see my response to five? The university might as well be a public park.
The violence is between protestors. The gentleman's agreement is Coulter or Milo or Whomever The F--k Deplorable Du Jour gets the microphone, the protestors get the bullhorns. Both sides get their free speech rights. The problem is a third group, the pro-deplorable counterprotestors, come in and say one side shouldn't shouldn't have their rights, in a manner of speaking. Violence ensues.

You're basically creating a legion of strawmen up in here. The cancelling of the speech is because Coulter is so toxic she wilts every flower within a mile radius of her person and brings doom and destruction. The university doesn't want to deal with the symptoms of this toxicity. That's totally different than somebody punching Coulter in the face as she opens her mouth.
5ive is offline  
Old 04-26-2017, 01:25 AM   #92
5ive
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
5ive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Harvard, in a place like Africa
Posts: 6,751
Re: Free speech

But, like, the cart is miles ahead of the horse at this point, as this is example #4237 of, "Yeah, uh, it appears we don't actually know what 'free speech' even means."

The saying goes 'free speech doesn't mean consequence-free speech' but that's always struck me as too nefarious. Better IMO is 'free speech doesn't mean criticism-free speech'.

This really just seems like a bunch of Deplorable Fanbois and Fangurls want a safe space for their Deplorable Heroes to not face the negative criticism of Real Life. That's both hilarious and disappointing.
5ive is offline  
Old 04-26-2017, 07:44 AM   #93
superslug
grinder
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 668
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive View Post
But, like, the cart is miles ahead of the horse at this point, as this is example #4237 of, "Yeah, uh, it appears we don't actually know what 'free speech' even means."

The saying goes 'free speech doesn't mean consequence-free speech' but that's always struck me as too nefarious. Better IMO is 'free speech doesn't mean criticism-free speech'.

This really just seems like a bunch of Deplorable Fanbois and Fangurls want a safe space for their Deplorable Heroes to not face the negative criticism of Real Life. That's both hilarious and disappointing.
No one is saying that speakers shouldn't be criticized. No one has come close to saying that. Stifling someone elses free speech isnt exercising your own right to free speech.

Set up a counter speech around the same time , protest peacefully outside it or even better ask them some difficult questions during the q and a , shouldn't be so hard given how ****e some of her views are.

Dont violently attack people attending the speech or stop them from speaking in the first place. It makes you look childish and your arguments look weak.

This issue is bigger than Coulter and Berkely though and There is a general trend on the authoritarian left right now to try and stifle free speech and it needs to end. Im glad people like Sanders are speaking up and are on the right side of this issue , maybe it will drill some sense into some people and make them realize that just because you are for free speech does not make you a Nazi , white supremacist or a bigot
superslug is offline  
Old 04-26-2017, 08:35 AM   #94
Bladesman87
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 12,638
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball View Post
As far as I know, this is correct. Student groups are allowed to invite whomever they please and the University is obligated to provide a space. This makes sense in that you want free inquiry and don't want the government deciding what is and isn't an appropriate idea.

However, that doesn't mean that the university couldn't argue that certain speakers would create mayhem that could be too dangerous or too onerous. If Berkeley Republicans start inviting every commenter from St0rmfr0nt to speak, then the subsequent protests and disruptions would cost millions and millions of dollars. Berkeley could then create a rule respecting speakers that sought to relieve the burden without singling out any particular ideology. This would be challenged in the courts, of course.

In this case it appears Berkeley cancelled the appearance because of safety concerns, claiming that they could not find a venue that would provide appropriate security on the date in question and that they had specific evidence of threats. If those are both true, then that seems perfectly reasonable. There is no first amendment right to conduct a speech on a specific date or at a specific time. The university is now willing to allow Coulter to speak on a different date, so there doesn't seem to be a first amendment issue anymore.

Are they lying about the threats, the venues and etc.? Maybe, but I'm not aware of any evidence. If they did lie, then they would almost certainly lose a lawsuit.
I'll retract my rant then and offer the following suggestion to US students:

At the start of each term, clog up the system by booking every room and area of the campus up for a left wing speech by a nobody.
Bladesman87 is offline  
Old 04-26-2017, 09:38 AM   #95
Gustafson26
grinder
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: WNY
Posts: 451
Re: Free speech

Pretty sure the left has the old saying, "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me" a little backwards on this argument.
Gustafson26 is offline  
Old 04-26-2017, 09:44 AM   #96
Black Peter
veteran
 
Black Peter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The Pass
Posts: 2,790
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet View Post
I guess I will start taking it easier on you. You have to be at least 70 to think Ann Coulter is hot.
lmao
Black Peter is offline  
Old 04-26-2017, 10:11 AM   #97
chezlaw
Limey Bastard
 
chezlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 32,797
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustafson26 View Post
Pretty sure the left has the old saying, "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me" a little backwards on this argument.
At some point we realised it wasn't true. That's about the time the PC movement got going.

It doesn't hurt like sticks and stones but language is not a passive thing. It's how we spread and reinforce cognitive biases, prejudice etc. along with increasing peoples propensity to act upon them.
chezlaw is offline  
Old 04-26-2017, 10:22 AM   #98
Lapidator
LLSNL Frequent Flyer
 
Lapidator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Station keeping
Posts: 10,236
Re: Free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustafson26 View Post
Pretty sure the left has the old saying, "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me" a little backwards on this argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw View Post
At some point we realised it wasn't true. That's about the time the PC movement got going.

It doesn't hurt like sticks and stones but language is not a passive thing. It's how we spread and reinforce cognitive biases, prejudice etc. along with increasing peoples propensity to act upon them.
I could be wrong, but I understood Gustafson's post to mean that words hurt more then sticks and stones...
Lapidator is online now  
Old 04-26-2017, 10:24 AM   #99
Gustafson26
grinder
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: WNY
Posts: 451
Re: Free speech

Ok, but wasn't it the conservative right wing students that invited her to speak? The people that would invite her more than likely share some, if not most of the same thoughts with her on the topics at hand. If there is a disagreement on something, that is the place to bring it up and make her answer the tough questions.
I don't see how the people causing her not to speak feel like they won. Because the college doesn't feel she has a safe venue to do so? That will really change the minds of the republican kids that invited her to speak in the first place.
They need to just let her speak, just as the right needs to allow people to speak they don't agree with. There needs to be civil debates about subjects, not just shouting down the opposition. That will leave everyone in the same boat we are now, if not farther apart.
The kids participating in the violent protests are the ones that need to be removed, not the speaker that is spitting words out of their mouth.
Gustafson26 is offline  
Old 04-26-2017, 10:26 AM   #100
Gustafson26
grinder
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: WNY
Posts: 451
Re: Free speech

Quote:
I could be wrong, but I understood Gustafson's post to mean that words hurt more then sticks and stones...
Actually the complete opposite. Well to the left, words hurt more but, what the speaker is speaking is not hurting anyone, it's a difference of opinion. What the violent protesters are doing is a lot more hurtful and fascist.

EDIT: reading what you wrote, I think you understood it as I wrote it.

Last edited by Gustafson26; 04-26-2017 at 10:34 AM.
Gustafson26 is offline  

 
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online