Annoying Orange executive order to bar research funds from anti free speech colleges

Author Topic: Annoying Orange executive order to bar research funds from anti free speech colleges  (Read 2781 times)

Ever since Nintendo shut down the News Channel, i've had to use the Blockland Forums for my source of unaltered news. Truly a sad time I live in.

Your opinion is that censorship is okay. It's unfortunate that "lol u mad" randomly became the way to win arguments because the quickest way to win an argument is say some blatantly stupid stuff that is guaranteed to cause some backlash.

We should rocket launch kittens into the sun while playing exploding kittens. There I win, get fukt, cucko. U mad?

My opinion was that not being given a platform isn't censorship, and you've done basically nothing to refute that, you just called me stupid because I dared to insult your brave gamer celebrities

But it's funnier, you launched more vitriol at me for posting that but you're the one who's being wronged here, really proving my point

My opinion was that not being given a platform isn't censorship, and you've done basically nothing to refute that, you just called me stupid because I dared to insult your brave gamer celebrities

But it's funnier, you launched more vitriol at me for posting that but you're the one who's being wronged here, really proving my point
Not being allowed to say something or show something is censorship. Your argument is inherently wrong.

My opinion is that the sun doesn't create light and the moon isn't reflecting the light from the sun. Putting "my opinion is" in front of something doesn't automatically keep it from being considered immediately wrong. But since you asked the reason for dismissal is that your argument is a contradictory statement.

Not being allowed to say something or show something is censorship. Your argument is inherently wrong.

Wow, gotta say, this is a compelling argument, I Have Seen The Light

So uhhh are mute people being censored by their inability to speak?

Not being allowed to say something or show something is censorship. Your argument is inherently wrong.

I gotta defend my right to be an starfish because it's all I have left! I can't let the liberals take this from me!

Because people shouldn't lose their jobs over something like this. If they want to resign, sure. If students or others pressure them to resign, sure. But there shouldn't be a LAW mandating someone be fired from their position because they don't properly uphold free speech in public spaces on publicly funded campuses.
Who would you fire? The president? The deans? The campus security officers? The teachers who encourage anti free speech behavior? It's much easier to use a deterrent where people have a chance to correct themselves instead of going "Ah, you forgeted it up, get the forget out, NEXT"
You know very well that the people who are going to suffer from this the most are people who have no problem with people expressing their opinions. The deans and senior staff make way too much money to be hurt by a funding cut. Random professors who probably have no problem with students expressing their opinion or inviting conservative debaters to campus might see a decrease in pay or even get laid off because of some random events like the one that happened at UC Berkeley. Not only that, but the ambitious students who invested in their future and are now having their access to important research funds could very well just be screwed over.

This whole bill is basically centered around damaging as many people as possible rather than holding individuals accountable for their discrimination. It's easy to see whose responsible. If a teacher kicks students out for having a different opinion then it's clear they need to be fired. If the dean lets teachers kick students out for having different opinions the dean needs to be fired. It's not illegal and in fact boards already fire staff for reasons like racism or loveism. So why can't we just add opinion discrimination to that list? It doesn't make sense.

Your 'deterrent' is a waste of time when you can just punish the people directly responsible. It's not going to deter anyone, its just going to make everyone angrier at conservatives. Even conservative students are gonna be angry because they now have less research funds available to them just because some random ass teacher in another wing of the college was being a libtard
« Last Edit: March 04, 2019, 01:48:35 PM by PhantOS »


loving duh, you losers can't self-police enough to take part of any public forum in good faith so nobody wants to house your handicapped antics. You just read this as "We're being persecuted"

okay Ike.

So uhhh are mute people being censored by their inability to speak?

I know Matthew is handicapped, but you realize he said "allow" right? Once again, you guys are so desperate to dunk on this dipstuff you end up concussing yourself because you don't know how to let go of the loving rim and land with some grace.

You know very well that the people who are going to suffer from this the most are people who have no problem with people expressing their opinions. The deans and senior staff make way too much money to be hurt by a funding cut. Random professors who probably have no problem with students expressing their opinion or inviting conservative debaters to campus might see a decrease in pay or even get laid off because of some random events like the one that happened at UC Berkeley. Not only that, but the ambitious students who invested in their future and are now having their access to important research funds could very well just be screwed over.

This whole bill is basically centered around damaging as many people as possible rather than holding individuals accountable for their discrimination. It's easy to see whose responsible. If a teacher kicks students out for having a different opinion then it's clear they need to be fired. If the dean lets teachers kick students out for having different opinions the dean needs to be fired. It's not illegal and in fact boards already fire staff for reasons like racism or loveism. So why can't we just add opinion discrimination to that list? It doesn't make sense.

Your 'deterrent' is a waste of time when you can just punish the people directly responsible. It's not going to deter anyone, its just going to make everyone angrier at conservatives. Even conservative students are gonna be angry because they now have less research funds available to them just because some random ass teacher in another wing of the college was being a libtard

I guess we'll have to wait and see the effects of this bill.

That means literally nothing in this discussion

I still want to know why politicians want to go to places/venues where they know they wont be received well.
Again, why walk into a biker bar and yell "Motorcycles are for girls!" and then expect a debate?

I still want to know why politicians want to go to places/venues where they know they wont be received well.
Again, why walk into a biker bar and yell "Motorcycles are for girls!" and then expect a debate?

There's a difference between a biker bar and a college campus... This is a really... off comparison, because it's not like people are going to HBCUs and yelling "mondayS" and expecting reasonable debate. They're stating relatively standard conservative opinions and getting stuffcanned for it.