Homo-genizing Free Speech
2 posters
Page 1 of 1
Homo-genizing Free Speech
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court said that a California law school can require a Christian group to open its leadership positions to all students, including those who disagree with the group's statement of faith.
In his dissent, Justice Samuel Alito castigated the majority opinion as political correctness run amok, "The proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express 'the thought that we hate,'" he wrote. "Today's decision rests on a very different principle: no freedom for expression that offends prevailing standards of political correctness in our
country's institutions of higher learning. … Brushing aside inconvenient precedent, the Court arms public educational institutions with a handy weapon for suppressing the speech of unpopular groups—groups to which, as Hastings candidly puts it, these institutions 'do not wish to … lend their name[s].' … I do not think it is an exaggeration to say that today's decision is a serious setback for freedom of expression in this country."
All the Court did here was to motivate protester/activist classes on all sides of the political and religious spectrum to infiltrate and subvert those college campus groups with which they disagree.
Perhaps Christians will infiltrate Islamic, atheistic, communist, gay organizations, etc. and elect themselves to leadership positions--thus neutralizing the opposition. If they are denied membership or a leadership position, then perhaps they will also try to sue their opposition into silence and submission.
Do you think that such turn about would be considered fair play? Ha! If a Christian wanted to infiltrate a homosexual or Muslim campus group with the purpose of neutralizing the group's stated purpose, then the Christian would be called a bigot and in danger of being charged with a hate crime.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5irL_-2G2z2zwGWMrKD-ebazXUNtgD9GKBB1G0
In his dissent, Justice Samuel Alito castigated the majority opinion as political correctness run amok, "The proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express 'the thought that we hate,'" he wrote. "Today's decision rests on a very different principle: no freedom for expression that offends prevailing standards of political correctness in our
country's institutions of higher learning. … Brushing aside inconvenient precedent, the Court arms public educational institutions with a handy weapon for suppressing the speech of unpopular groups—groups to which, as Hastings candidly puts it, these institutions 'do not wish to … lend their name[s].' … I do not think it is an exaggeration to say that today's decision is a serious setback for freedom of expression in this country."
All the Court did here was to motivate protester/activist classes on all sides of the political and religious spectrum to infiltrate and subvert those college campus groups with which they disagree.
Perhaps Christians will infiltrate Islamic, atheistic, communist, gay organizations, etc. and elect themselves to leadership positions--thus neutralizing the opposition. If they are denied membership or a leadership position, then perhaps they will also try to sue their opposition into silence and submission.
Do you think that such turn about would be considered fair play? Ha! If a Christian wanted to infiltrate a homosexual or Muslim campus group with the purpose of neutralizing the group's stated purpose, then the Christian would be called a bigot and in danger of being charged with a hate crime.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5irL_-2G2z2zwGWMrKD-ebazXUNtgD9GKBB1G0
Keli- Number of posts : 3608
Age : 73
Location : Zarr Chasm, WV--between Flotsam and Belch on the Cheat River
Registration date : 2007-12-28
Re: Homo-genizing Free Speech
The cure for this is two fold.
1. Move the group away from the school. Make it a private entity with no affiliation with the school, then,
2. Turn about is fair play. Do exactly as hinted at int he article. Inflitrate, homosexual, Islamic, and other groups witht he sole purpose of nuetralizing them or sueing them into silence.
1. Move the group away from the school. Make it a private entity with no affiliation with the school, then,
2. Turn about is fair play. Do exactly as hinted at int he article. Inflitrate, homosexual, Islamic, and other groups witht he sole purpose of nuetralizing them or sueing them into silence.
Cato- Number of posts : 2010
Location : Behind my desk
Registration date : 2007-12-28
Similar topics
» Mich. minister wins appeal on free-speech grounds
» This is what the left thinks of free speach and a free press
» Hate speech?
» Is the Qu'ran Hate Speech?
» When is hate speech not hate speech?
» This is what the left thinks of free speach and a free press
» Hate speech?
» Is the Qu'ran Hate Speech?
» When is hate speech not hate speech?
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum