Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have not read over every link, but lets say you are right.
Why is it worse for the students who pay tuition to want their tuition dollars spent on a speaker they actually want to listen to vs the religious right and other professional groups dictating to them who to listen to ?????
Seems to me that the second is far worse.
Probably because they are young, immature and uneducated and so perhaps the University could expose them to a range of beliefs and let them weigh the merits?
Your post basically says that people that pay their money to LEARN shouldn't have to be exposed to ideas you don't like.
That pretty much sums up a lot of higher education anymore.
Exclusion of ideas, can't let those kids get any *crazy* ideas can we?
Someone already responded to the first half, so i will respond to this.
I dont even disagree with you, im just saying that if you are going to pay for a speaker, I dont see a problem with you paying for one you like.
They aren't the only people at the school, and others want to see those speakers. So in your mind one group has the right to shut down speech of anyone they don't like, while another group has no say in the matter? I don't ever see conservative student groups doing this type of stuff. Even your link shows it's not the conservatives shutting down speech. I see disinviting as a little different than disrupting, but still don't see a lot of conservative groups demanding an invitation to be rescinded or disrupting a speech of someone they disagree with.
Just a FYI ... student organizations typically receive funding from the university.
So yes, tuition money does pay for speakers. At least a portion of their speaking fees.
Again, so? There are different opinions and schools of thought out there, and if one group wants to invite someone another group doesn't like, what right does the one group have to disrupt it?
This is disingenuous. I looked at examples listed by FIRE at the link you provided and the vast majority of these cases were either speakers critical of the Catholic Church's stance on abortion cancelled by private Catholic schools or pro-Palestinian speakers cancelled by schools after pro-Israel lobbying. These are religious issues, not leftists cancelled by conservatives.
U of C is a big business school know for their top ranked MBA program. A lot of people who go there, donate, and in Chicago's business community are conservative.
Again, so? There are different opinions and schools of thought out there, and if one group wants to invite someone another group doesn't like, what right does the one group have to disrupt it?
Its not enough to just not attend an event from a speaker you disagree with -- these students are taking it upon themselves to violently protest when people show up with opinions they don't like to shut down what could be an honest and open discussion of opposing ideas. At what point did college become a place to run screaming from intellectual challenges and debate?
Universities are bowing down to these people and banning Conservative speakers because nutty left-wing students can't be trusted to not cause a violent riot when a right-wing speaker is allowed to give a speech. And somehow its Milo or Ben's fault when its unhinged Progressives threatening violence to shut down these speakers. Its no different than violence at Trump riots, from anti-Trump supporters being blamed on Trump rather than the people throwing eggs and punches.
That list from FIRE is overwhelmingly Conservative speakers getting disinvited. In addition, campus Conservative groups don't stage threatening protests when a Liberal speaker shows up on campus.
Again, so? There are different opinions and schools of thought out there, and if one group wants to invite someone another group doesn't like, what right does the one group have to disrupt it?
Did I challenge anything you said except for the fact that tuition DOES help pay for speakers?
If one wants to make an argument, it does help to have your facts in order.
Did I challenge anything you said except for the fact that tuition DOES help pay for speakers?
If one wants to make an argument, it does help to have your facts in order.
Didn't mean to offend. I just thought you were like dj saying tuition pays for it, so students should be allowed to pick and choose which speakers get to speak.
U of C is a big business school know for their top ranked MBA program. A lot of people who go there, donate, and in Chicago's business community are conservative.
I think it's more because they are a strong academic school that knows that safe places and speech restrictions go against real academic principals.
Frankly, why accommodate people that are intellectually and maturity impaired to the extent that they need safe spaces?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
