In many countries liberty ends where the liberty of others begins, so things like hate speeches are forbidden.
2 Likes
She’s not the government, you seem to be confused about what the heckler’s veto is.
Sorry, but I’m not in favor of starting a new legal doctrine where people have to consider whether they’re not being sufficiently polite to speakers in public areas. What’s the standard? You tell me, since you want to create one: That someone still be intelligible through background noise? Does loud construction count? Should intent matter? Are we really prepared to start pushing this bullshit through the courts?
I’m sorry, but the whole idea is complete bullshit from the top down. Legislating “civility” for various values of “civility” is a waste of everyone’s time.
And people think college students are too sensitive and whiny. Sheesh.
10 Likes
Probably. The German word for bagpipes is Dudelsack, which is even worse.
5 Likes
Oh my gosh, my alma mater is on BoingBoing! I’m so happy it wasn’t something worse considering it’s a Florida university. Like “gators eat multiple freshmen” or something since half the campus is a nature preserve.
3 Likes
Rather, why are amplified performances allowed?
1 Like
OK, try for a moment to think like a religious bigot… what would you hope to accomplish by going anywhere and megaphone demonizing people for their sexual preferences? What do these people think will happen? What is their best case scenario?
edit to add: Your first amendment rights only apply to actions of the federal government or of the state.
6 Likes
They aren’t really thinking, per se, in that they’re forming a concrete plan with a clearly defined end goal and steps. It’s closer to the format of that common joke, “Step 1: Go out in public and denounce non-conforming people. Step 2: ??? Step 3: Profit Prophet Christian theocracy!”
There are multiple aspects to why people do this, and most of them are on the authoritarian scale, including compartmentalized thinking, assumption of widespread support due to the individual cultivating a social environment that supports their worldview, poor reasoning skills, a lack of a theory of mind and empathy with people that share his worldview (i.e. it’s so self-evident to him that he literally can’t comprehend anyone else not thinking like this), and various other aspects. But if you asked him what his goal was and what he thought it would accomplish, I would be willing to bet money that the answer would be something along the lines of “They needed to hear it,” or “I don’t know, but I needed to say it,” or other such arrangements.
11 Likes
I see your point. At UF, they just eat the kids at the daycare across the street from Lake Alice.
1 Like
- God sees them in action, makes a note in their permanent record: “8/30/2016: Used bullhorn to shame, convert, and save sinners from Hell. A+ effort!”
- People convert on the spot, join church, denounce Liberal Agenda, donate money to church.
- People get bullhorns, stand on street corners to shame, convert, and save sinners from Hell.
- Repeat #1.
7 Likes
That’s really the thing there. Proselytizing is specifically called out as a thing you should do in much of Christianity. In certain sects its sinful not to. So these people get extra Jesus points for doing this and everyone else gets punished for not listening.
5 Likes
And to a certain kind of mind, both of these are good things.
4 Likes
I’m not sure the first amendment applies to any of it. The piper passed no laws abridging his freedom of speech.
3 Likes
skimming the thread I read “shot down by a heckler”. kind of understandable, imho - normally the 2nd amendment is part of 1st amendment discussion.
3 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
