Trump to sign EO for free speech on colleges / universities that receive federal funding .

a reply to: LSU2018

a reply to: scraedtosleep

Needing an executive order to enforce the first amendment .

Should have never happened .

But here we are .

At least it’s equal justice .

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
So, this is going to include free-speech such as... LGBT+ curriculum? pro-abortionism? is this going to protect these "Marxist teachers" and "cultural-Marxists" studies? would this protect schools teaching safe-sex education? would this protect classes in that include pro-transgender gender studies? anti-religion courses?

or is this just a way to pander to the base who whine about "muh free-speech"


anyone who believes that the "constitution" or the "president" grants you the right or privilege of "free speech" is a slave to their own mind

Last I checked, those people aren't on college campuses being silenced. Maybe you don't understand the point of this thread.

originally posted by: MyToxicTash
a reply to: XAnarchistX

Good point does a Christian school have to let gay folk give talks?.

Christian schools are private, this is for schools getting federal funding. But if it's a public Christian school then yes, they have to let queers and lesbians give talks if they want to continue getting funding.

I worked with Milo Yiannoplous in 2015, 2016

His appearance on various campuses exposed just how calcified the mindset had grown.

From my perspective, there wasn't a written or canonized leftist manifesto being followed. It was simply a matter of complicity. What Milo (and a few others) exposed was the ideological scaffolding being built. There was/is a clear 'group think' being shared shared by students and faculty. When Milo appeared at DuPal U, he was physically threatened and the stage was overrun by leftists preventing him from speaking. The university explicitly told the campus security/police to stand down and not interfere. This scenario repeated itself all over the country.

Again and again, the irrational outbursts revealed how sheltered the environment was becoming.

There was no school policy per se requiring the silencing of specific kinds of speech. There were no rules in the handbook describing how mobs should form, block access in and out of buildings, or assault the infidels.

It was a matter of leadership not stopping it. There were enough adults in charge who's ideology desired the mobs.

When conservative, libertarian, or simply uninvolved students were 'exposed' by leftists, they were threatened, attacked, lied about, smeared publicly, doxed, and beaten up. (* and this happened dozens of times. If you ask me for dozens of references, I'm not going to play along. Do your own research).

In a nutshell, many people with an inherent intrest in controlling the environment turned a blind eye to civil liberties being abused. Not due to policy, but because of complicity.

Milo may be on the other end of his fame cycle for now, but he truly opened the eyes to the wider public. The Berkley riots were instrumental in waking people up.

I did the wrap design for his tour bus (among other pieces)

originally posted by: MyToxicTash
a reply to: pavil

Are you opposed to trans folk giving talks to kids? It works both ways.
I'm not opposed to anyone except pedo's giving talks...# does this mean a pedo group could demand to give talks?. I dunno just asking.

I'm opposed to sickos giving talks to kids, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna get in their way and stop them. Can you name a time when they've been blocked from such?

originally posted by: o0oTOPCATo0o
a reply to: Fallingdown

I wouldn't call it grandstanding,
But this very well could be a nice campaign strategy to rile up the left and have them come together, against the very thing that makes us the best country in the world.
The more the far left freaks out about freedom and justice, the more votes he gathers up for re-election.

Yep, and if they try to overturn it, it shows that they're against the constitution and free speech.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Pyle
I dont think institutions must provide a forum is part of the first amendment, even for the government, but college and universities must?

Private institutions do not have to. But if they are taking federal money they have to accept any strings attached to that money.

Which is wired, the government is saying you MUST have this speech, when the governments role in speech is to not do that.

No, the government's role is to make sure it's allowed. If it's not then why aren't we all living under our own set of rules in our own households?

a reply to: Breakthestreak

Yes actually the more groups do such things openly the more their cause is hurt.

I never understood why anyone thinks having their enemies skulking in the shadows is better than in the open in the light of day where all can see them.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Fallingdown

Seems to me like this will be good for both conservatives and liberals.

Pro-choice studies will now be protected as will liberal minded teachers.

Their right to speak their liberal ideas can't be challenged after this.

Unless this eo only protects the right of conservative ideas? I don't know I didn't read it yet.

Does it protect ALL free speech? Even hard hard left lib/comie speech?

Nobody gets punched in the face for their retarded liberal ideas. Nor do the normals silence them. This protects against that, though.

originally posted by: Fallingdown
a reply to: LSU2018

a reply to: scraedtosleep

Needing an executive order to enforce the first amendment .

Should have never happened .

But here we are .

At least it’s equal justice .

Equal justice? Sounds like the newest racist dog whistle used by us Conservatives.

a reply to: Ksihkehe

I am not in the camp of f it and let it ride. He does not get any good coverage so it is not like doing something like this will make it worse.

originally posted by: theAWfuLWaFFLe
a reply to: IkNOwSTuff

In reality the numbers show that people's political leanings are greatly influenced by their level of education. If you would like a link to the statistics for the United States educational level and age correlating to political leanings I'm sure I could dig it up.

Please do, I'd like to look through the data and methodology.

a reply to: LSU2018

This protects against that, though.

Right , that's what I'm saying. Though I believe this to be a tiger with no claws. Because i don't believe in the universities are making people liberal conspiracy. I think this is a progressive nation and will continue to be so.

But I like the spirit of the eo. More diversity of voices and ideas in our universities can only be a good thing. As long as the eo , That I still haven't read lol, is about equal voice for all and doesn't single out any one group.

It is funny that some dems will fight it . But I don't think it will get much push back.
We will probably hear more about the dems that complain from the right wing media then the left. lol

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: theAWfuLWaFFLe

So now climate science is considered "liberal", evolution is "liberal", being pro civil rights is "liberal", putting historical atrocities (slavery, Native American Genocide, Confederate monuments) in context is "liberal". These aren't liberal ideas or brainwashing, they're facts and they care little for your or my feelings. In essence my issue is what is being classified as liberal is just reality.

Teaching facts is not "liberal." Teaching opinions on those facts as facts is a problem.

As an example, climate science is a legitimate, if new, science field. There is nothing wrong with teaching what it is, what the prevailing theories are, the reasoning behind those theories, methods of gathering historical data, etc., etc., etc. What is not OK is teaching that certain theories are immutable and and must be assumed accurate without question, or teaching false information like the "97% scientific consensus" nonsense. What is worse, and fascist, is forbidding anyone in a class from legitimately questioning theories.

Evolution is a theory with some evidence to support it and other evidence that calls it into question. It should be taught as such, not as a law of nature that is inviolable. And no one should ever be prohibited from questioning it.

Pro-civil rights is not "liberal," but neither is "anti-civil rights" conservative. There are often two (or more) sides to every issue, and college is there to present the different sides, not mandate which side is correct.

Putting historical occurrences in context is certainly not "liberal"; that would be "conservative" in my view. But that is certainly not being done. Historical context is actually missing from many history courses, and is falsified in others. As an example, the War of Northern Aggression is being taught as being solely an attempt to end the evils of slavery. What is not mentioned is that the vast, vast majority of Confederate soldiers DID. NOT. OWN. SLAVES.

I agree completely with President Trump's Executive Order.

TheRedneck

Well stated, sir.

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
So, this is going to include free-speech such as... LGBT+ curriculum? pro-abortionism? is this going to protect these "Marxist teachers" and "cultural-Marxists" studies? would this protect schools teaching safe-sex education? would this protect classes in that include pro-transgender gender studies? anti-religion courses?

or is this just a way to pander to the base who whine about "muh free-speech"


anyone who believes that the "constitution" or the "president" grants you the right or privilege of "free speech" is a slave to their own mind

You're a lazy thinker aren't you.

originally posted by: MyToxicTash
a reply to: XAnarchistX

Good point does a Christian school have to let gay folk give talks?.

Only if that school receives federal funding. Its literally right there in the OP title..

a reply to: LSU2018

Your kind of hard to get a read on.

Was that sarcasm ? 😇

originally posted by: theAWfuLWaFFLe
a reply to: Fallingdown

Indulge me with just one. That's it, one. For the record there should be free speech on campuses, no brainer, funny thing is it's already present. This whole EO exercise is just a way to pander to his base plain and simple. Enjoy the koolaid.

I agree it is for sure pandering and unnecessary but do you not view colleges a being one giant leftist echo chamber where wrong think is shut down. I've been seeing it for several years now and only getting worse.

As has already been alluded to, it's not necessarily the college leadership that stop conservative speeches directly -- but they certainly do indirectly by not putting in place strict protocol for security to follow and enforce in order to stop their intolerant students from running riots on campus grounds and effectively forcing a cancellation of speeches due to security concerns (lack of security).

In many cases they even go so far as to order their security staff to stand down and just watch while the intolerant/hateful students intimidate/assault/destroy -- which we can only assume is meant so that the situation plays out this way where they have "no choice" but to cancel the event. It also rises the cost of security to ridiculous levels which many speakers aren't able to pay for (seeing as they try and push the costs onto them).

And this isn't even getting into why their students are so damned sensitive to the idea of letting people they might disagree with, to simply provide a speech.

Something definitely not right with the way these universities are being run (to say there is no "progressive agenda" is being very disingenuous). Happy that the administration is noticing and will be doing something about it, as it goes way beyond partisan politics.

a reply to: Fallingdown

Needing an executive order to enforce the first amendment .

Have you read the first amendment?