posted on Feb, 24 2014 @ 10:59 PM
Firstly, as it has already been pointed out, it doesn't make since for someone to oppose free speech when they are essentially giving a speech that
was published. I guess it's nice to have a soap box with some visibility. Of course this reflects the attitude of the privileged class where the
rules only apply (or not) when they need them to.
“If our university community opposes racism, sexism, and heterosexism, why should we put up with research that counters our goals?” asked Korn
in her column.
She believes that the majority of the student body, teaching staff, etc., opposes racism and sexism, that sounds about right as the most people are
against discrimination based on race or sex. She also adds that the University community opposes heterosexism, discrimination or prejudice by
heterosexuals against homosexuals (or any alternative sexual lifestyle) in favor of opposite-sex sexuality. With all the different sexual orientations
that are excepted as legally equal, isn't this just more sexism? Sure seems like a loaded term to use at any rate.
I wonder what the majority really believe. I'm willing to bet that the majority of the students are interested in the opposite sex with a very few
being "curious" about the alternatives. Many of the straight students are probably accepting of alt lifestyles, some believe it is completely
disgusting, but I'm willing to bet most are just tolerant, not interested and not politically supportive. Personally, I think people should just keep
that stuff to themselves.
Ultimately I have to accept the fact that everyone has rights, but these privileged liberals have to accept that as well. Don't go flaunting your
liberal attitude in my face and tell me I have to believe these extremist ideas are morally correct like you do because we all have the freedom to
live and think the way we want to.