Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Guest
You do mention some interesting points. Yes, some students have had terrible experiences which would cause re-living them if certain trigger points were brought up. This is PTSD. Those students should be able to seek safe zones just as rape victims, veterans, or other disabling challenged persons.
Students should be able to disinvite speakers who the majority do not agree with their views. David Duke would not be as welcome at Howard Universitiy as he would be at Liberty Universitiy, would he?
|
You and I agreed but l I have a different thought as respects your second paragraph.
Clearly you are referencing one's right to chose to listen. Essentially, this nation was founded on the principal of free speech and expression to ensure the minority view was heard. It may be your right not to attend David Duke's presentation but it is quite another to demand that no one hear him speak.
Because I welcome David Duke to speak doesn't mean I agree with him or his ideas. Actually, his kind have expressed their views in this nation for a very long time. Did their words and ideas harmed anyone? Did they resonate with the majority hyping up the population? (rhetorical questions of course)
The majority in this nation reinforce their rejection and disdain for what David Duke preaches just as they do with Black Lives Matter.
The more egregious issue of course is if a government, a university a corporation , town etc can control what message people receive it can only lead to a repressive regime. Its akin to having "thought police"
In my minds eye selective speech ( policing thoughts) falls in line with the dichotomy of repressive and/or radical governments or groups wherein all who do not agree with them are thus their enemies
This is absolute thinking and the only real absolute is death and most of us are fighting to disprove that one too
Personal Best Regards: