Geraldo Rivera quits Yale over college name change --"political correctness is lame"

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: chadderson
My argument was never about their rights.

You said, and I quote:

originally posted by: chadderson
"They have no right to change the name based on their(THE LEFT's) feelings, just as you are trying to say "its nobody's business what a private organization does".

See, they do have the right. They can change it for whatever reason they want. You just don't like it.

Did anyone here say they do not have the right to change the name?

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: chadderson
a reply to: Shamrock6

The argument is not about whos choice it is to change the name or if they have the right to.

The argument is about the lefties crying foul until they get their way, strongarming an institution like Yale into changing the name of a building. Attempting to erode a man's legacy to the point of being removed from history.

The "argument" is about righties getting upset about a private institution exercising their prerogative.

"Argument" being in quotes because it's really just a statement of fact and one side is pretending it's not.

Are you upset about the righties excercising their right to criticize?

I'm more wondering why we aren't talking about the original snowflake in all of this Geraldo Rivera. Isn't the OP about him?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It is their right, and how you can spin that as regressive in the least is pretty perplexing. It's their right to do so and they get to reap the results of that, good or bad. If that's a regressive attitude in your brain then I dunno what to tell you except sorry you hate rights so much.

And pointing out that it's their right to do as they wish is not me being upset, though I'm sure it'd be easier for you if you thought I was. It's me pointing out that it's their right to do so.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: chadderson
My argument was never about their rights.

You said, and I quote:

originally posted by: chadderson
"They have no right to change the name based on their(THE LEFT's) feelings, just as you are trying to say "its nobody's business what a private organization does".

See, they do have the right. They can change it for whatever reason they want. You just don't like it.

Did anyone here say they do not have the right to change the name?

Yep.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Did anyone here say they do not have the right to change the name?

Yeah, they guy I just quoted.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It is their right, and how you can spin that as regressive in the least is pretty perplexing. It's their right to do so and they get to reap the results of that, good or bad. If that's a regressive attitude in your brain then I dunno what to tell you except sorry you hate rights so much.

And pointing out that it's their right to do as they wish is not me being upset, though I'm sure it'd be easier for you if you thought I was. It's me pointing out that it's their right to do so.

Who cares? I'm just pointing out the stupidity of your argument. Criticism doesn't end where rights begin.

duplicate post.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Did anyone here say they do not have the right to change the name?

Yeah, they guy I just quoted.

You know he didn't mean it that way.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It is their right, and how you can spin that as regressive in the least is pretty perplexing. It's their right to do so and they get to reap the results of that, good or bad. If that's a regressive attitude in your brain then I dunno what to tell you except sorry you hate rights so much.

And pointing out that it's their right to do as they wish is not me being upset, though I'm sure it'd be easier for you if you thought I was. It's me pointing out that it's their right to do so.

Who cares? I'm just pointing out the stupidity of your argument. Criticism doesn't end where rights begin.

It's interesting you say that when the underpinnings of the anti-pc crowd argument for the last 8 - 9 years has been along the lines of how people calling you racist or a bigot for the words you were saying is infringing on your rights to free speech.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
You know he didn't mean it that way.

This seems pretty cut and dry to me:

originally posted by: chadderson
"They have no right to change the name based on their(THE LEFT's) feelings, just as you are trying to say "its nobody's business what a private organization does".

Can Yale change the name for any reason they want? Yes or no? If 'yes', then explain it to the poster I am quoting.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It is their right, and how you can spin that as regressive in the least is pretty perplexing. It's their right to do so and they get to reap the results of that, good or bad. If that's a regressive attitude in your brain then I dunno what to tell you except sorry you hate rights so much.

And pointing out that it's their right to do as they wish is not me being upset, though I'm sure it'd be easier for you if you thought I was. It's me pointing out that it's their right to do so.

Who cares? I'm just pointing out the stupidity of your argument. Criticism doesn't end where rights begin.

It's interesting you say that when the underpinnings of the anti-pc crowd argument for the last 8 - 9 years has been along the lines of how people calling you racist or a bigot for the words you were saying is infringing on your rights to free speech.

It is free speech, but entirely unethical. It is your right to speak in such a way but you have no right to silence criticism.

originally posted by: chadderson
You argued the right has no right to complain about Yale's move. Namely, "its nobodys business what a private organization does".

I did not ever say they do not have the right, they most certainly do, I just think they are all snowflakey for doing it.

Yale has the right to change the name. I worded my sentence poorly and apologize for misrepresenting my message. I believe their move is a detriment to their image as a whole. (of which i know you dont care

)

So you now agree they can change it for whatever reason they want? Up to and including 'the left's feelings'?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You argued the right has no right to complain about Yale's move. Namely, "its nobodys business what a private organization does".

I countered that by saying, the left "made it their business" until Yale caved in... so why are you calling the right "snowflakes" "with delicate sensibilities" when they bash Yale for caving to PC?

Is this not the same thing the left just did to get their way?

Yale has the right to change the name. I worded my sentence poorly and apologize for misrepresenting my message. I believe their move is a detriment to their image as a whole. (of which i know you dont care )

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
You know he didn't mean it that way.

This seems pretty cut and dry to me:

originally posted by: chadderson
"They have no right to change the name based on their(THE LEFT's) feelings, just as you are trying to say "its nobody's business what a private organization does".

Can Yale change the name for any reason they want? Yes or no? If 'yes', then explain it to the poster I am quoting.

Yes they can and apparently they have. But if they continue to buckle from the pressure of PC groups, the school will be changing its name to my little pony.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So you're pointing out that it's stupid of me to point out that it's stupid of others to complain about somebody else entirely doing something they're perfectly entitled to do?

Cool.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Yes they can and apparently they have. But if they continue to buckle from the pressure of PC groups, the school will be changing its name to my little pony.

But here is the thing, LesMis, I don't care if they do that either. That's their issue to deal with.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It is their right, and how you can spin that as regressive in the least is pretty perplexing. It's their right to do so and they get to reap the results of that, good or bad. If that's a regressive attitude in your brain then I dunno what to tell you except sorry you hate rights so much.

And pointing out that it's their right to do as they wish is not me being upset, though I'm sure it'd be easier for you if you thought I was. It's me pointing out that it's their right to do so.

Who cares? I'm just pointing out the stupidity of your argument. Criticism doesn't end where rights begin.

It's interesting you say that when the underpinnings of the anti-pc crowd argument for the last 8 - 9 years has been along the lines of how people calling you racist or a bigot for the words you were saying is infringing on your rights to free speech.

It is free speech, but entirely unethical. It is your right to speak in such a way but you have no right to silence criticism.

And that is why your argument is flawed. Me calling you a racist or even you calling me a snowflake isn't silencing criticism. It is just speaking an opinion about someone that is offensive. And those words that you are saying I don't have the right to say are actually covered under the first amendment too.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So you're pointing out that it's stupid of me to point out that it's stupid of others to complain about somebody else entirely doing something they're perfectly entitled to do?

Cool.

Though the argument was stupid, it is hypocritical of you, since they are entitled to criticize.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

Yes they can and apparently they have. But if they continue to buckle from the pressure of PC groups, the school will be changing its name to my little pony.

That's why I questioned motivation.

Buckle enough to pressure groups and it ceases to be a solid business approach and instead becomes a reflection of the whims of a vocal few.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It is their right, and how you can spin that as regressive in the least is pretty perplexing. It's their right to do so and they get to reap the results of that, good or bad. If that's a regressive attitude in your brain then I dunno what to tell you except sorry you hate rights so much.

And pointing out that it's their right to do as they wish is not me being upset, though I'm sure it'd be easier for you if you thought I was. It's me pointing out that it's their right to do so.

Who cares? I'm just pointing out the stupidity of your argument. Criticism doesn't end where rights begin.

It's interesting you say that when the underpinnings of the anti-pc crowd argument for the last 8 - 9 years has been along the lines of how people calling you racist or a bigot for the words you were saying is infringing on your rights to free speech.

It is free speech, but entirely unethical. It is your right to speak in such a way but you have no right to silence criticism.

And that is why your argument is flawed. Me calling you a racist or even you calling me a snowflake isn't silencing criticism. It is just speaking an opinion about someone that is offensive. And those words that you are saying I don't have the right to say are actually covered under the first amendment too.

Your argument is confusing. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here. Free speech is a fundamental human right. The first amendment is not the same as free speech. It's naive to use them interchangeably.