Why Liberals Hate Free Speech

[frigidweirdo]

Liberal hate anything they cannot control, No matter how hard they try they cannot pass any laws in regard to putting limits on free speech.

There are many laws limiting Free Speech, for good reason, although we want as few as possible.

Who doesn't want laws against treason? Libel? etc?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Liberal hate anything they cannot control, No matter how hard they try they cannot pass any laws in regard to putting limits on free speech.

There are many laws limiting Free Speech, for good reason, although we want as few as possible.

Who doesn't want laws against treason? Libel? etc?

We're still trying to get PC to tell us if even those restrictions on Free Speech are valid? God only knows how many times she's been asked.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The unborn baby is not 'their body.'
It is a totally different, unique individual with it's own DNA, fingerprints, organs, etc.

That just happens to be unable to live on its own.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Liberal hate anything they cannot control, No matter how hard they try they cannot pass any laws in regard to putting limits on free speech.

If only that were true, Des.....

Example....they deprive religious institutions of non-profit status if they engage in political speech.....
unless it is Liberal political speech.

It happened under the great Liberal who destroyed the black family....LBJ.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Liberal hate anything they cannot control, No matter how hard they try they cannot pass any laws in regard to putting limits on free speech.

What are conservatives content not to control?

Religion, thought, speech......liberty.

Thank's for giving me that opportunity.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So when the Constitution of the United States was being ratified which group, Federalists or Antifederalists were the liberal group?

Which of the Liberals in this quote do you agree with?

" ...the anger among LGBT activists with Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) passage into law.
...the pizzeria was shut down due to death threats and other threats of violence, as well as an attempt to ruin their business reputation.


A girls golf coach at an Indiana high schooltweeted, “Who’s going to Walkerton, INto burn down #memoriespizza w me?”
The pizzeria outside South Bend received death threats and harassmentand feltforced to shut downthe shop. It’s Yelp page wasvandalizedwith obscene and homo-erotic pictures. The owners have said they don’t know if it will be safe to re-open.


.The wrath of gay rights supporters rained down on Memories Pizza because O’Connor committed a thought crime. She discriminated against nobody, but thinks the “wrong” thing about same-sex marriage and she said it out loud."
Liberal Kirsten Powers Blasts LGBT Activists as Intolerant Bullies

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Liberal hate anything they cannot control, No matter how hard they try they cannot pass any laws in regard to putting limits on free speech.

What are conservatives content not to control?

Religion, thought, speech......liberty.

If only...

 

[PoliticalChic]

Liberals are the power in the political realm....and they illustrate what Lord Action meant about power absolutely corrupting those who control it.



1." ...do any of you actually remember a time when liberals truly supported and believed in freedom of speech.... genuine,bona fide agreement with the principle that liberty includes allowing those with whom you disagree to have access to the marketplace of ideas, and that this marketplace itself will decide which are the best ones. You know, Voltaire's "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it," and all that?

I can't either. Probably nobody can who was not born during or before World War II,



2.... those on the Left do not believe in free speech. They simply do not accept the fundamental principle that people of all opinions ought to be able to express those opinions without being punished for it, or at least hindered to the greatest degree possible in their ability to express themselves.



3. [Thus the] editorial in Harvard's student newspaper The Crimson, in which Sandra Korn, a student columnist and "women's studies" major (who didn't see that one coming?) obligingly calls for academic totalitarianism,

"Yet the liberal obsession with 'academic freedom" seems a bit misplaced to me. .... No academic question is ever 'free' from political realities. If our university community opposes racism, sexism, and heterosexism, why should we put up with research that counters our goals simply in the name of "academic freedom"?



"Instead, I would like to propose a more rigorous standard: one of 'academic justice. When an academic community observes research promoting or justifying oppression, it should ensure that this research does not continue.



"The power to enforce academic justice comes from students, faculty, and workers organizing together to make our universities look as we want them to do. Two years ago, when former summer school instructor Subramanian Swamy published hateful commentary about Muslims in India, the Harvard community organized to ensure that he would not return to teach on campus. I consider that sort of organizing both appropriate and commendable. Perhaps it should even be applied more broadly...


There, in a nutshell, is the modern liberal attitude toward freedom of speech, and by extension freedom of thought. If research doesn't substantiate the cultural goals and priorities of today's Neo-Fascists, then we must ensure that it "does not continue." Why liberals hate freedom of speech



If speech refutes the Left's positions on any number of issues, then it has to be silenced. "Academic justice" means suppression of all those naughty things that people might say that contradict us.


As far as speech is concerned, the Left definitely prefers a command economy over the free market.

Liberals basically oppose anything that doesn't advance the class conflict.

Gee.....that sounds like something right out of the writings of their patriarch, Karl Marx.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Yeah, it was probably that damn Jefferson and his, all men are created equal thing. Add to that the liberals then insisted on a Bill of Rights with a freedom of speech article. Add to that Adams and the Conservatives trying to stop the speech thing with the Sedition Act. In any case it was the beginning of the end of America's first conservative party.

The term 'Liberal' today has nothing to do with the Founders, you liar.

The modern term is simply a re-naming of the Socialist Party.

1. "[Socialists] knew that liberalism had a good reputation with the working classes — the very audience which they were targeting. The idea was to adopt the name liberal to describe socialism. Socialism, as socialism, was harder to sell. But by taking a name they did not deserve they felt they could make political gains on the backs of classical liberalism. And they did." Jim Peron, "How Socialist John Dewey Switched Labels"

 

[PoliticalChic]

Liberals basically oppose anything that doesn't advance the class conflict.

Liberals oppose what goes against liberalism, common sense, and human decency...

For both Liberals, and you socialists, " the central theme is still an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life., albeit at the loss of what had hitherfore been accepted as ‘inalienable human rights.’"
Goldberg

 

[thereisnospoon]

Liberals are the power in the political realm....and they illustrate what Lord Action meant about power absolutely corrupting those who control it.



1." ...do any of you actually remember a time when liberals truly supported and believed in freedom of speech.... genuine,bona fide agreement with the principle that liberty includes allowing those with whom you disagree to have access to the marketplace of ideas, and that this marketplace itself will decide which are the best ones. You know, Voltaire's "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it," and all that?

I can't either. Probably nobody can who was not born during or before World War II,



2.... those on the Left do not believe in free speech. They simply do not accept the fundamental principle that people of all opinions ought to be able to express those opinions without being punished for it, or at least hindered to the greatest degree possible in their ability to express themselves.



3. [Thus the] editorial in Harvard's student newspaper The Crimson, in which Sandra Korn, a student columnist and "women's studies" major (who didn't see that one coming?) obligingly calls for academic totalitarianism,

"Yet the liberal obsession with 'academic freedom" seems a bit misplaced to me. .... No academic question is ever 'free' from political realities. If our university community opposes racism, sexism, and heterosexism, why should we put up with research that counters our goals simply in the name of "academic freedom"?



"Instead, I would like to propose a more rigorous standard: one of 'academic justice. When an academic community observes research promoting or justifying oppression, it should ensure that this research does not continue.



"The power to enforce academic justice comes from students, faculty, and workers organizing together to make our universities look as we want them to do. Two years ago, when former summer school instructor Subramanian Swamy published hateful commentary about Muslims in India, the Harvard community organized to ensure that he would not return to teach on campus. I consider that sort of organizing both appropriate and commendable. Perhaps it should even be applied more broadly...


There, in a nutshell, is the modern liberal attitude toward freedom of speech, and by extension freedom of thought. If research doesn't substantiate the cultural goals and priorities of today's Neo-Fascists, then we must ensure that it "does not continue." Why liberals hate freedom of speech



If speech refutes the Left's positions on any number of issues, then it has to be silenced. "Academic justice" means suppression of all those naughty things that people might say that contradict us.


As far as speech is concerned, the Left definitely prefers a command economy over the free market.

Liberals despise any speech that exposes their narrative, agenda, fallacy of their political correctness and their hypocrisy.
Other than that freedom of speech is just dandy.
Example.....For most or even all of the reasons listed above, liberals HATE Fox News and conservative talk radio. They HATE IT.....
Liberals would like to see banned any form of information which provides an alternative to they they want Americans to read, see or hear

 

[NYcarbineer]

Liberals basically oppose anything that doesn't advance the class conflict.

Liberals oppose what goes against liberalism, common sense, and human decency...

For both Liberals, and you socialists, " the central theme is still an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life., albeit at the loss of what had hitherfore been accepted as ‘inalienable human rights.’"
Goldberg

Believe it or not, Liberals do not allow themselves to be defined by Goldberg.

 

[PoliticalChic]

2. "Wanting Separation of church and State is not hating freedom, it's embracing freedom to be who we want without the threat of some Flying Spaghetti Monster disapproving."
Can you find such a view in any of America's founding documents?

See: Amendment, First...

Sure:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Clearly you are mistaken in imagining that the first amendment included any such 'separation of church and state.'

I love teaching you new things.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Liberal hate anything they cannot control, No matter how hard they try they cannot pass any laws in regard to putting limits on free speech.

There are many laws limiting Free Speech, for good reason, although we want as few as possible.

Who doesn't want laws against treason? Libel? etc?

Gads, what an imbecile.

Treason, the only crime spelled out in the Constitution, has nothing to do with free speech.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The unborn baby is not 'their body.'
It is a totally different, unique individual with it's own DNA, fingerprints, organs, etc.

That just happens to be unable to live on its own.

So, any individual in that condition should be put to death?

You must be a Liberal.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

2. "Wanting Separation of church and State is not hating freedom, it's embracing freedom to be who we want without the threat of some Flying Spaghetti Monster disapproving."
Can you find such a view in any of America's founding documents?

See: Amendment, First...

Sure:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Clearly you are mistaken in imagining that the first amendment included any such 'separation of church and state.'

I love teaching you new things.

When they banned the nation from calling itself a religious nation, they built the wall, and that was on purpose.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Liberal hate anything they cannot control, No matter how hard they try they cannot pass any laws in regard to putting limits on free speech.

There are many laws limiting Free Speech, for good reason, although we want as few as possible.

Who doesn't want laws against treason? Libel? etc?

Gads, what an imbecile.

Treason, the only crime spelled out in the Constitution, has nothing to do with free speech.

How about libel? Valid restriction on free speech, or not? Yes or no, please...

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yeah, it was probably that damn Jefferson and his, all men are created equal thing. Add to that the liberals then insisted on a Bill of Rights with a freedom of speech article. Add to that Adams and the Conservatives trying to stop the speech thing with the Sedition Act. In any case it was the beginning of the end of America's first conservative party.

The term 'Liberal' today has nothing to do with the Founders, you liar.

The modern term is simply a re-naming of the Socialist Party.

1. "[Socialists] knew that liberalism had a good reputation with the working classes — the very audience which they were targeting. The idea was to adopt the name liberal to describe socialism. Socialism, as socialism, was harder to sell. But by taking a name they did not deserve they felt they could make political gains on the backs of classical liberalism. And they did." Jim Peron, "How Socialist John Dewey Switched Labels"

Socialism is why conservatism is dead.

You can fall down now. You're dead.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Can you name a liberal college that in its student handbook actually warns students against exercising their free speech rights?

Oh gee you can't?

Hmmm... I can name a famous CONSERVATIVE school that does. Bob Jones University.

"We desire to treat students fairly and to serve their needs effectively. We are open to constructive input regarding how we may improve our service to students, campus life and the testimony of BJU. Mass and social media are powerful tools to communicate truth. In the spirit of honor and wisdom,

however,

students should not use media to disparage BJU

but should instead pursue truth in love by following this grievance process."

So who hates free speech again? lol

http://www.bju.edu/life-faith/student-handbook.pdf

Can you provide the hand book of any branch of the military indicating where the mess hall is located?
No. You can't Because its not in the Regulations or the UCMJ.....But that does not mean soldiers are not fed.
Nice try genius..
The fact is these liberal speech codes are "unofficial" but very much real and enforced.

 

[PoliticalChic]

2. "Wanting Separation of church and State is not hating freedom, it's embracing freedom to be who we want without the threat of some Flying Spaghetti Monster disapproving."
Can you find such a view in any of America's founding documents?

See: Amendment, First...

Sure:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Clearly you are mistaken in imagining that the first amendment included any such 'separation of church and state.'

I love teaching you new things.

When they banned the nation from calling itself a religious nation, they built the wall, and that was on purpose.

I note you were unable to provide such a reference in our founding documents.

That's because you made up the statement, as you so often do.

Unlike you....I'm certain there'll be an honest Liberal coming along any day......

......any day......

....any........