Donald Trump Signs Executive Order to Defend Free Speech on Campus

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Krakatoa

Correction, YOU think it's stupid.

It's stupid to think that I have to say that I think it's stupid.

So, you had a stupid thought...deal with it dude. It happens to everyone. Just because people disagree with your opinion, does not mean they or their opinion is stupid. Unless you think you are superior in some form (which I know you are not).

Is that the case Mr. P?

a reply to: Krakatoa

So, you had a stupid thought.

Correction, you think my thought is stupid.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Krakatoa

Correction, you think my thought is stupid.

Aww... then please, educate me. Explain to me why you think it is stupid, and please try to use more than 2 wisecrack sentences. I know you can do it....you can, after all, you are Phage.

originally posted by: Phage
But all a school has to do is say "We support free speech."

Surely that's just to start with... and then they have to actually follow through and demonstrate it on and ongoing basis. No more cancelling conservative (or liberal though we all know that pretty much never happens) speakers just because they can't (choose not to) control their own students from rioting in their own campus grounds.

a reply to: Duderino

Large state universities were already required to abide by the 1st, so this won't apply to them in any way it does not already.

Should probably do you research on Berkley and others then........

This is really only going to affect smaller, private colleges that were out of the spotlight and could actually discriminate until now. Many of those are private Christian schools.

A lot of them dont get federal funding, but if they do , i reckon they will have to play by the same rules, as they should.......

a reply to: Krakatoa

I did.
1) It's stupid because it threatens valuable research.
2) It's stupid because, what does this mean?

Sec. 3. Improving Free Inquiry on Campus. (a) To advance the policy described in subsection 2(a) of this Order, the heads of covered agencies shall, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, take appropriate steps, in a manner consistent with applicable law, including the First Amendment, to ensure institutions that receive Federal research or education grants promote free inquiry, including through compliance with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, and policies.

If an institution is violating federal law, they are violating federal law.

More fodder for the base. Nothing more.

originally posted by: Navieko

originally posted by: Phage
But all a school has to do is say "We support free speech."

Surely that's just to start with... and then they have to actually follow through and demonstrate it on and ongoing basis. No more cancelling conservative (or liberal though we all know that pretty much never happens) speakers just because they can't (choose not to) control their own students from rioting in their own campus grounds.

There is a little more to it, see above. But it's pretty damn vague.
And yes, there are very few cases of administrators "banning" any speakers.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Krakatoa

I did.
1) It's stupid because it threatens valuable research.
2) It's stupid because, what does this mean?

Sec. 3. Improving Free Inquiry on Campus. (a) To advance the policy described in subsection 2(a) of this Order, the heads of covered agencies shall, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, take appropriate steps, in a manner consistent with applicable law, including the First Amendment, to ensure institutions that receive Federal research or education grants promote free inquiry, including through compliance with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, and policies.

1) Only if that institution has been found to be suppressing free speech. Then. the funding is in jeopardy. Simple, don't jeopardize that funding over political bias. The target of the funding is irrelevant...that is an appeal to emotion. Or, is that a stupid idea according to you?

2) It means that these institutions have been put on notice that if found to be not actively advocating the Constitutional protections of freedom of speech/express to staff and student body, as outlined int he 1st Amendment, then the OMB will begin investigating. The OMB can review their federal funding use and it could be withdrawn until such time as they prove, beyond a statement, but by actions, to overtly protect all peoples 1st Amendment rights.


I'm sure you can decipher that if I did?

After all, you are Phage....right?

a reply to: Krakatoa

Only if that institution has been found to be suppressing free speech.

As determined by whom? The court?

The OMB can review their federal funding use and it could be withdrawn until such time as they prove, beyond a statement, but by actions, to overtly protect all peoples 1st Amendment rights.

Screw the court. Let bureaucrats figure it out.

a reply to: Phage

The only ones threatening valuable research are the ones denying free speech in America 😎

Nazi Germany had all kinds of "valuable research" too and denied all kinds of "free speech" 😎

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Krakatoa

Only if that institution has been found to be suppressing free speech.

As determined by whom? The court?

The OMB can review their federal funding use and it could be withdrawn until such time as they prove, beyond a statement, but by actions, to overtly protect all peoples 1st Amendment rights.

Screw the court.

That is a valid point, and one in which I addressed in an earlier post without letting my emotions rule my keyboard and saying it was stupid. The type of metrics used has not been defined. That I would like to have answered myself.

Lacking in detail, sure. But "stupid", really?

I thought your were Phage, not silly.

a reply to: Krakatoa

Lacking in detail, sure. But "stupid", really?

Ok.

Ill conceived. Better?

a reply to: Phage

More fodder for the base. Nothing more.

I should think it would be a concern to everyone who whishes to uphold the constitution is it not?

That shouldnt be just a conservative thing, or a Trump base thing........

We hear all the time the left yelling about free speech when they feel they are being stymied........so would this not remedy this all the way around?

Free speech shouldnt be defended just for those views we agree with, thats not why it was implemented in the first place......

Unless were just missing each other here, which is entirely plausible

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

That shouldnt be just a conservative thing, or a Trump base thing

But it usually is.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Krakatoa

Lacking in detail, sure. But "stupid", really?

Ok.

Ill conceived. Better?

Yes... Ill conceived ideas are not always stupid. They may be reckless and uniformed....but using the term stupid really diminishes your position. It makes you less of a Phage.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

That shouldnt be just a conservative thing, or a Trump base thing

But it usually is.

You have stats to back up that assertion, Mr. P?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

That shouldnt be just a conservative thing, or a Trump base thing

But it usually is.

Is it valid? yes its true conservatives have been run off campuses and indeed halted from speaking because it might cause people to be uncomfortable........

But shouldnt everyone be allowed that right to speak?

Free and sound thought should stand on its own merits, there should be no need for it to be stymied, filtered, or suppressed.........

If people are threatened by dissenting opinion being heard, perhaps their own views arent as solid as they claim........

Then again , theres always are old friend V

To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Is it valid? yes its true conservatives have been run off campuses and indeed halted from speaking because it might cause people to be uncomfortable.

Examples?

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

That shouldnt be just a conservative thing, or a Trump base thing

But it usually is.

You have stats to back up that assertion, Mr. P?

No, just anecdotes.