College students don't understand the 1st Amendment, at all

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Milo is not a hateful person. Find an actual example.

[JA]

Milo is not a hateful person. Find an actual example.

Yeah... I'll stick with my example. Milo is a hateful, trashy little troll.

[7,052,770]

1. Are these results significantly different than the rest of the population?

2. Are these results significantly different than college students in the past?

I doubt the answer to either question is Yes.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Democrats on here are being really hypocritical. You know that if this was a poll on Republicans all of you would be freaking out and rightly so , but you should also be freaking out at this poll as well.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Only one of those questions pertains to the actual application of the First Amendment and its content, which was "Does the First Amendment protect hate speech?" On that question, the political divide between Democrats and Republicans is almost statistically insignificant (a mere 5%). I suspect the cause of this stems from ongoing debate concerning whether the First Amendment protects hate speech or not; there are some voices that support the perspective that it shouldn't. So, I suspect there is a confusion over should and does.

The other three questions do not concern themselves with the legal application of the First Amendment, but whether or not college students support an environment conducive to speech from potentially unsavory perspectives and voices. Why should a person such as Milo be allowed, not from a legal perspective, but rather from a social one, to speak freely and spew hate? Yes, it is perfectly acceptable to shout down such speakers and, in certain circumstances, violence may even be acceptable. Fascism should never be tolerated. Although we cannot suppress it legally, we can socially.

They also tried to block Ben Shapiro from coming

[publicunofficial]

Only one of those questions pertains to the actual application of the First Amendment and its content, which was "Does the First Amendment protect hate speech?" On that question, the political divide between Democrats and Republicans is almost statistically insignificant (a mere 5%). I suspect the cause of this stems from ongoing debate concerning whether the First Amendment protects hate speech or not; there are some voices that support the perspective that it shouldn't. So, I suspect there is a confusion over should and does.

The other three questions do not concern themselves with the legal application of the First Amendment, but whether or not college students support an environment conducive to speech from potentially unsavory perspectives and voices. Why should a person such as Milo be allowed, not from a legal perspective, but rather from a social one, to speak freely and spew hate? Yes, it is perfectly acceptable to shout down such speakers and, in certain circumstances, violence may even be acceptable. Fascism should never be tolerated. Although we cannot suppress it legally, we can socially.

They also tried to block Ben Shapiro from coming

Ben Shapiro is Milo with a stick up his ass.

[Ban my account ffs!]

1. Are these results significantly different than the rest of the population?

2. Are these results significantly different than college students in the past?

I doubt the answer to either question is Yes.

Why don't you leave that up to a qualified scientist, Harry.  Know your place!

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Liberals, I want you to imagine if the world was different.  Imagine that the vast majority of college students and professors were Conservatives.

Imagine that a liberal speaker was being invited to a University.  Then, some Conservative students violently disrupted that speaker.  They justified their actions by saying that their opponents were Communist baby-murderers and don't have the right to free speech.

I don't think you'd like that very much.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Liberals, I want you to imagine if the world was different.  Imagine that the vast majority of college students and professors were Conservatives.

Imagine that a liberal speaker was being invited to a University.  Then, some Conservative students violently disrupted that speaker.  They justified their actions by saying that their opponents were Communist baby-murderers and don't have the right to free speech.

I don't think you'd like that very much.

Remember tyt is boycotting Harvard cause of Harvard disinviting Manning .

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Milo is not a hateful person. Find an actual example.

I don't believe in free speech for paedophiles.

[Horus]

This is the start of generation z. They've never lived without the internet, they've grown up in an extremely safe world - and many now view words as violent. I do not know how we can stop this nonsense.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Liberals, I want you to imagine if the world was different.  Imagine that the vast majority of college students and professors were Conservatives.

Imagine that a liberal speaker was being invited to a University.  Then, some Conservative students violently disrupted that speaker.  They justified their actions by saying that their opponents were Communist baby-murderers and don't have the right to free speech.

I don't think you'd like that very much.

Remember tyt is boycotting Harvard cause of Harvard disinviting Manning .

lol. I think Harvard can manage just fine with tyt boycotting them over a traitor.

TYT is trash, but calling Manning a traitor is disgusting.

[Kamala]

Liberals, I want you to imagine if the world was different.  Imagine that the vast majority of college students and professors were Conservatives.

Imagine that a liberal speaker was being invited to a University.  Then, some Conservative students violently disrupted that speaker.  They justified their actions by saying that their opponents were Communist baby-murderers and don't have the right to free speech.

I don't think you'd like that very much.

Remember tyt is boycotting Harvard cause of Harvard disinviting Manning .

lol. I think Harvard can manage just fine with tyt boycotting them over a traitor.

TYT is trash, but calling Manning a traitor is disgusting.

I mean, he kind of is one though.

She's not a traitor.

[Suburbia]

This is the start of generation z. They've never lived without the internet, they've grown up in an extremely safe world - and many now view words as violent. I do not know how we can stop this nonsense.

They are sheltered little snowflakes and they will be dealt with in a rough fashion in the real world. No one cares about your feelings. I don't care if you are black or gay or whatever.

[GGover]

"MUH FREEZE PEACH"
"MUH CONSTITOOSHUN!!!"

[Santander]

This is the start of generation z. They've never lived without the internet, they've grown up in an extremely safe world - and many now view words as violent. I do not know how we can stop this nonsense.

They are sheltered little snowflakes and they will be dealt with in a rough fashion in the real world. No one cares about your feelings. I don't care if you are black or gay or whatever.

Try again. Defending free speech doesn't mean we shouldn't care about others' feelings. It means that sometimes, hurt feelings are a price that need to be paid for freedom.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Restricting speech will obviously end up with people like Eugene Debs going to prison for years because they dared to criticize the latest war.

[AtorBoltox]

Conservatives need to stop spreading the lie that the 1st amendment protects you from social consequence, or that it forces people to listen to you and provide you a platform.

[AtorBoltox]

Anyway, seeing as 'muh freeze peach' has become the newest rallying cry/deflection tactic of the far right it's no wonder we're seeing a backlash against the whole concept, as misguided as that is

[publicunofficial]

It'd be cool if conservatives used the 1st amendment for anything other than defending racism or giving corporations unlimited power over the Democratic process.

[Devout Centrist]

Please show me where I've suggested private universities shouldn't be able to dis-invite speakers?  Keep in mind Berkeley is in California and has the Leonard Law.

You said it was disgusting and ran away. Not exactly a foolproof way to layout your position.

I'm still floored at the fact you're a middle aged man using this site. Wow.

[darklordoftech]

After they've spent the first 18 years of their life in an institution that declares anything that offends someone to be "bullying", punishes any speech that "promotes drugs", and tells them how to dress, should we really be surprised?

[dead0man]

Please show me where I've suggested private universities shouldn't be able to dis-invite speakers?  Keep in mind Berkeley is in California and has the Leonard Law.

You said it was disgusting and ran away. Not exactly a foolproof way to layout your position.

yeah, haven't been back in the thread since

You must be logged in to read this quote.

so, like the moron in the other thread, you are saying that it's uncool for old guys to talk politics on an online message board, but totally cool for teenagers and young adults?  'cause it seems like that's what you're saying.  You don't see the problems with this?  Two really obvious ones, probably a couple more I'm not seeing.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Only the first one has anything to do with the 1st Amendment, although yes, the majority are wrong.
The First Amendment protects shouting down a speaker you dislike just as much as it protects that speaker. Yes, it doesn't prohibit the hosting venue from having people doing that ejected from the premises...just as it doesn't prohibit the venue cancelling the speaker either. What a concept!
For the third bit...so the vast majority disagree?
And the final bit has nothing to do with the 1st Amendment, since a university could implement such a policy like that. Of course it's just something that people will say they agree with without thinking it through heavily, do you really think that many think any speakers at LGBT events should always have a "counter"?

[dead0man]

For the third bit...so the vast majority disagree?

Thank Og it only takes "vast majorities" to make people dead and small groups and individuals never do

1 in 5 think it's ok to initiate violence to further their political goals.  It was the part I found the most disturbing.  That is a huge problem, a lot of people are going to be hurt and killed because of this line of thinking....but whatever right?  They're just college kids, what have people in their late teens and early 20s ever done that was violent?