President Trump Signs Executive Order Protecting Free Speech On College Campuses | TIME

[eva01beserk]

Hiku said:

eva01beserk said:

If someone wants to speak at a public institution then yes, let them. As long as i government funded its public. 

Even if the students think having someone speaking too often is disruptive to their studies?

Anyway, who exactly has prevented someone from speaking at a public campus? You now said Milo was banned. I looked that up, and it turns out he spoke at Berkeley as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCqeDhhfl4Y
They just didn't 'roll out the red carpet' because during his visit earlier that same year, the riots that ensued cost the campus an estimated $100 000 in damages, which along with the millions in costs for security were contributing factors to the planned event being cancelled. But he was not banned from speaking at the campus from what I can tell.

eva01beserk said: 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.

If they need to pay money for venue organisation, security, promotion, etc, then yes. They may only have room for one of them.
And if that's the case, shouldn't it be the one most people would be interested in hearing?

It's not a strawman. I did not understand why you said it doesn't matter what most people want, so I worded my question in a way that would both express why I'm confused by that statement, and prompt an explanation from you.
The confusion, if it's still unclear, comes from the fact that I consider the kind of platform Shapiro got as a limited commodity. Even if he says 'I'll do it for free', it'll still cost the campus time and money to organize the event.
And in that case, it would be in their best interest to be selective of who they chose to host.

eva01beserk said:
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. 

And I addressed that by saying that violence and hate are not the same thing.
You said that they are 'supposed' anti-nazi and anti-hate because they riot.

eva01beserk said:
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.

Yeah, I assume the nazis at the unite the right rally were there for more than just disagreeing with people.
I think people can live without using the sieg heil gesture, and I don't think it's a slippery slope that will lead to us being forbidden from using peace signs one day. Germany banned hate speech, and they're still able to express themselves freely as long as they fight the urge to call black people the n-word.

Though I don't know which method I prefer. But I'm sure those people think they are right regardless of whether or not they're allowed to spread their message at public squares.

There's a saying about how being tolerant of other people's intolerance will lead to the tolerant ones being exterminated.
Trump for example wants journalists and publications to have their licenses revoked, and even have the FBI investigate comedy shows (Saturday Night Live), because he doesn't like what they say.

Are they being forced to listen to the speech? How on earth is it disrupting them. Or are they like Jehovah witness going straight to your dorm for a one to one speech? As far as I know they could just, not attend or something crazy like that. 

Ive already adresed that about milo. He was banned and he snuk in. that little video you posted, the real thing lasted less than 20 min before security escorted him out.

You just answerd your own strawman in diferent pagraphs. Having both events is not an issue. Like I said before but you keep ignoring. The university can make it as dificult as they want. If ben shapiro wants to go for free and the plaza and the majority has their prefered speaker at the stage, then whats the problem? its costing nothing to the university. No student has to hear him. He can get his own security as he did once before And the other speaker can be as confy as they want even at a diferent date if nesesary. Im sure ben would not object delaying his speech a week or 2.

Nope. I dint say they where anything. They when live on tv and online and declared themselves antifa, black lives matter and what ever other groups there are. I cant say I know them all. But unlike you that are calling everyone who was at the unite the right a nazi. And here I am saying that there where nazis at that event. But where they all nazis? I bet you think so. Event after the interviews of people saying that they are not associated with the nazis.

Germany can express themselfs freely? Is it me or is a chinese tourist doing a joke nazi salute at a memorial in germany and going to jail for it, not freedom. Unlike you I believe that forcing someone to behave a certain way will make the person want to reject that way even more. Im not gona say I know what the best method is, but I can tell you now that force is not the way.

Well thats the most clear proof that this conversation will lead to nowhere but ill adress it anyways. Just because trump dosent like what they say? Im not a trump fan by any means, nor do I like defending him. But to say that after the 2 straight years of fake news and dog piling they media has being doing, Im just here picturing you puting your fingers in your ears and yelling when somebody talks. Theese jurnalist have been nothing but childish. Im with trump on this one as I do believe they are the ones spliting this country by constaly lying. Even with cases like the covintong kids that was proven to be false they still had the balls to keep pushing the fake news. then after they just ignore it and never apologise or even retract it and you believe thats professionalism? As far as saturday night live I have no idea what thats about so I wont coment.