Hiku said:
eva01beserk said:
Already corrected that I got the speaker wrong, it was milo.
Universitys can make invitations and cancel them at any point sure. They can offer money to who they like to speak and offer nothing to thouse they deemed hateful. I got no problems with that. But if the university does not incetivice anybody to come and they say thats ok Ill do it for free, I dont even need a stage or anything and you still have a problem and say completly ban the person, then that is just insane.
|
Do you mean that as long as someone is willing to do something at your institution, you need to let them do it?
eva01beserk said:
And no. It should not require a majority vote. If 100 out off 20000 want to invite a certain person, if they can afford it then just let them. |
I'm not sure I follow you here?
If 100 out of 20000 want Justin Bieber, and 19900 out of 20000 want Beyonce, Justin Bieber should get the spot?
eva01beserk said:
I dont really mind hate. Im hispanic living in a 99% white state. If people hate me I could not care less. As long as they dont do anything to me they can say what they want. This is the problem I have with what you say. even if I hated someone who hates me, that still gives me no wright to attack them if they have done nothing to me yet. Fighting back in self defense I got no problem with. But the riots i have seen, the destruction, the people getting hurt by antifa and other extremist just because someone is talking and they dont like it is not acceptable. Thats child like behavior. |
I didn't say they have a good reason to attack someone. In fact, I said "Threats of violence should never be tolerated though".
What I said was, they have a good reason to hate people who for example hate others due to the color of their skin.
Hate and violence are not the same thing, even if they often go hand in hand. You can hate someone without wanting to physically hurt them.
A person who hates someone that hates others due to the color of their skin would by definition not be anti-hate if you take the term literally. But that term is usually used to describe people who are against discrimination and hate based on ethnicity, sexuality, religion, etc.
When you say that you're fine if people hate you for being hispanic, I'm sure you do to a degree. When it's just words. But those kind of words are often meant to encourage action.
|
If someone wants to speak at a public institution then yes, let them. As long as i government funded its public.
Does having justin bieber stop beyonce from coming? Then I dont see a problem. I know its a straw man what you just said, but to enagage it anyways. at worst lest say theres only one venue. The only issue I see is that they both cant be there at the same time. You could even have the most popular firt if you want, even another week if it pleases you. But having one does not exclude the other.
I know you dint say that they have good reason. I dint claimed that you did. But I was being more specific to my original post as I clearly said thouse anti hate groups where rioting, but you clearly side stepped that.
But thats the thing, you asume that because some desagree with you you think they are conspiring against you. And even if they do they are doing so in a public square, the first thing to do before silencing them is resonable argument. Let the public know why they are wrong and hateful. If you just shut them down you are admiting to them that you cant respond and they think they are correct. If they are inciting violence then that is against the law and they should go to jail.
