Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
The Kitchen Sink
Why the entire country is still talking about a UC Berkeley professor’s toxic dating advice
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="The Liturgist" data-source="post: 77646003" data-attributes="member: 424341"><p>You’ve been beaten and jailed by the CCP regime or one of its many international allies that has( in violation of the treaty by which Britain transferred Hong Kong sovereignity) subjugated Hong Kong, for advocating for the restoration of civil liberties there? </p><p></p><p>Because if so, I greatly admire your courage and regret what happened to you. </p><p></p><p>I also understand and sympathize with your concerns about how the Woke Movement in the US is eroding free speech. A professor at a taxpayer-funded university like UC Berkeley ought to be able to say whatever he wants to say, aside from speech not covered by the First Amendment (for example, terroristic threats, statements made in contempt of court, slander and libel, disclosure of classified military information and intelligence that would endanger our soldiers, civilians and the network of foreign espionage agents who risk their lives to provide our intelligence agencies, shouting “fire” in a theater, and a few other very limited restrictions).</p><p></p><p>Now one can argue that employers like UC Berkeley ought to have the right to discipline or terminate employees who say things that cause them embarassment, but I have concerns about how far this is going, in that obviously, if someone cannot fully enjoy their first amendment right to freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom of assembly, and so on, without risking their livelihood, this has the effect of compromising the first amendment, which is why I am so concerned by it.</p><p></p><p>My view is that organizations, whether public or private, if they are to be allowed to fire people on the basis of offensive or harmful speech, should be limited to only the most egregious statements, which might otherwise be unlawful, such as disclosure of trade secrets and other confidential information, slander and libel, and calling for violence against members of a specific ethnic group or religion or sex (as an example of this, I would refer,llsome recent remarks made by persons on the Far Left that threaten practitioners of Judaism and people of Jewish descent.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="The Liturgist, post: 77646003, member: 424341"] You’ve been beaten and jailed by the CCP regime or one of its many international allies that has( in violation of the treaty by which Britain transferred Hong Kong sovereignity) subjugated Hong Kong, for advocating for the restoration of civil liberties there? Because if so, I greatly admire your courage and regret what happened to you. I also understand and sympathize with your concerns about how the Woke Movement in the US is eroding free speech. A professor at a taxpayer-funded university like UC Berkeley ought to be able to say whatever he wants to say, aside from speech not covered by the First Amendment (for example, terroristic threats, statements made in contempt of court, slander and libel, disclosure of classified military information and intelligence that would endanger our soldiers, civilians and the network of foreign espionage agents who risk their lives to provide our intelligence agencies, shouting “fire” in a theater, and a few other very limited restrictions). Now one can argue that employers like UC Berkeley ought to have the right to discipline or terminate employees who say things that cause them embarassment, but I have concerns about how far this is going, in that obviously, if someone cannot fully enjoy their first amendment right to freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom of assembly, and so on, without risking their livelihood, this has the effect of compromising the first amendment, which is why I am so concerned by it. My view is that organizations, whether public or private, if they are to be allowed to fire people on the basis of offensive or harmful speech, should be limited to only the most egregious statements, which might otherwise be unlawful, such as disclosure of trade secrets and other confidential information, slander and libel, and calling for violence against members of a specific ethnic group or religion or sex (as an example of this, I would refer,llsome recent remarks made by persons on the Far Left that threaten practitioners of Judaism and people of Jewish descent. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
The Kitchen Sink
Why the entire country is still talking about a UC Berkeley professor’s toxic dating advice
Top
Bottom