I got ya.
I think in general, regarding academics, most would argue they are for academic freedom and against censorship - but there are cases where some have used the structure of the academy to silence voices they don’t like. I’m sure a fair amount of leftist scholars in the United States were silenced in various ways (denial of tenure, not finding a job where research and writing were a key part of their work, as opposed to teaching, etc). Even today, there are some people who don’t manage to find a place to do their work, free from administrative or colleagial animosity. Obvious, it pales in comparison to the Soviet Union, where scholars could disappear on a whim, with the majority of that happening under Stalin - but it’s not insignificant here in the US, having certain voices, not silenced, maybe, but certainly dismissed and belittled (or heard and mocked). It’s the Orwell vs. Huxley conundrum, no?
But again - my point to @enso was not to say we should silence this guy, but rather knowing his role in Prop 8 allows people who DO NOT want to give to someone who actively worked against their CIVIL RIGHTS is not in any meaningful way, censorship. If I don’t buy or use his product because I don’t like it, I’m not censoring him either. I’m just choosing to not give him my money/time. As a consumer I have ever right to make that choice. He has no right to my money or time. He needs to earn it and if him being homophobic means I don’t want to give him my money/time, that’s my right to decide. It isn’t censorship. That would be the government not allowing him to speak, arresting him for being homophobic, or put him to death for being homophobic. I am not a government. if you think me thinking the guy is homophobic is censorship, then I don’t know what else to say here. I would also not like to give my money or time to racists or sexists, and that’s not censorship either.
