Free Speech for Me, but Not For Thee

[Binger]

Both sides are burning books, literally and metaphorically, and both sides are whipping up the rage in the base.

CFR.

And try not shooting yourself in the foot this time.

see eff are eff you. ell em eff ay oh. What is your point here, K? Do you think that the one side is censoring or banning and another side is not?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZaXq338HN4

[K Graham]

Doesn't help. Do you really think the reason that Mein Kampf hasn't been burned is because the book burners believe in it? Is it even in public school libraries?

It means they're offended by fiction books that threaten their religious sensibilities more than they are a book by arguably the world's greatest monster. It shows they're not really against evil so much as they're against anything that could threaten their quest for power.

[K Graham]

CFR.

And try not shooting yourself in the foot this time.

see eff are eff you. ell 'em eff ay oh. What is your point here, K? Do you think that the one side is censoring or banning and another side is not?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZaXq338HN4

Good Lord, it was a simple call for reference, for you to back up your statement. That's usually too much to ask of people who don't know what they're talking about.

[Binger]

see eff are eff you. ell 'em eff ay oh. What is your point here, K? Do you think that the one side is censoring or banning and another side is not?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZaXq338HN4

Good Lord, it was a simple call for reference, for you to back up your statement. That's usually too much to ask of people who don't know what they're talking about.

except for I showed a video of hippies burning books, records and a batting cage. So there was that.

[Res Ipsa]

Doesn't help. Do you really think the reason that Mein Kampf hasn't been burned is because the book burners believe in it? Is it even in public school libraries?

It means they're offended by fiction books that threaten their religious sensibilities more than they are a book by arguably the world's greatest monster. It shows they're not really against evil so much as they're against anything that could threaten their quest for power.

Would you be okay with book burning as long as it was consistent?

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

In the interest of balance - from The Hill:

The ACLU and Mr. Strangio’s discontent involves a book by Abigail Shrier called “Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters.” In it, she makes the case that while adults should have the freedom to undergo medical transition, teenagers are a different matter.

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, she wrote: “Social contagions exist, and teen girls are particularly susceptible to them. The book takes a hard look at whether the sudden spike in transgender identification among teen girls is yet another social contagion to befall girls who, in another era, might have fallen prey to anorexia or bulimia.”

You’d think that liberals — at the ACLU, of all places — would defend an author’s right to make her case, whether it agreed with that case or not. But not Chase Strangio, who serves as the ACLU’s deputy director for transgender justice. “Abigail Shrier’s book is a dangerous polemic with a goal of making people not trans,” he tweeted. “I think of all the times & ways I was told my transness wasn’t real & the daily toll it takes. We have to fight these ideas which are leading to the criminalization of trans life again.”

Then, just to make sure we understand what Mr. Strangio means when he says “we have to fight these ideas,” he goes on to say: “Stopping the circulation of this book and these ideas is 100% a hill I will die on.”

“You read that right,” Ms. Shrier wrote in her op-ed. “Some in today’s ACLU favor book banning.”

She goes on to tell us about a woman named Grace Lavery, a professor of English at the University of California, Berkeley, who tweeted: “I DO encourage followers to steal Abigail Shrier’s book and burn it on a pyre.”

I’m sure I could find more examples of Leftists trying to stymie free speech and banning books. Also, let’s not forget colleges and universities across America allow students to shut down speeches and debates by Conservatives with regularity. This isn’t even an open secret; it’s encouraged by faculty and some administrators.

- Doc

[K Graham]

Good Lord, it was a simple call for reference, for you to back up your statement. That's usually too much to ask of people who don't know what they're talking about.

except for I showed a video of hippies burning books, records and a batting cage. So there was that.

Your youtube linked to the Disco Demolition of 1979 which had nothing to do with the Democrats. If anything, the rage against disco likely had more to do with the perception of it being Black music (Soul Train) or gay music (Village People). Gee, I wonder who would be involved in that kind of protest. But the fact that you had to dig back 42 years for some smidgen of a counter-example, kinda reinforces the point that "both sides" are hardly doing the "same thing."

[K Graham]

It means they're offended by fiction books that threaten their religious sensibilities more than they are a book by arguably the world's greatest monster. It shows they're not really against evil so much as they're against anything that could threaten their quest for power.

Would you be okay with book burning as long as it was consistent?

The act of book burning doesn't bother me. You bought it, you own it. In the immortal words of EZ-E, "I don't care if they burn my CDs, they bought that schit." What bothers me is the attempt by the religious to turn this country into a theocracy.

[K Graham]

And by the way, my 80 year old stepdad who watches FOX 24/7 was the quintessential hippie back in the 70's. He looked like Mick Fleetwood with a hangover.

Don't assume all hippies back then were democrats.

[K Graham]

In the interest of balance - from The Hill:

The ACLU and Mr. Strangio’s discontent involves a book by Abigail Shrier called “Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters.” In it, she makes the case that while adults should have the freedom to undergo medical transition, teenagers are a different matter.

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, she wrote: “Social contagions exist, and teen girls are particularly susceptible to them. The book takes a hard look at whether the sudden spike in transgender identification among teen girls is yet another social contagion to befall girls who, in another era, might have fallen prey to anorexia or bulimia.”

You’d think that liberals — at the ACLU, of all places — would defend an author’s right to make her case, whether it agreed with that case or not. But not Chase Strangio, who serves as the ACLU’s deputy director for transgender justice. “Abigail Shrier’s book is a dangerous polemic with a goal of making people not trans,” he tweeted. “I think of all the times & ways I was told my transness wasn’t real & the daily toll it takes. We have to fight these ideas which are leading to the criminalization of trans life again.”

Then, just to make sure we understand what Mr. Strangio means when he says “we have to fight these ideas,” he goes on to say: “Stopping the circulation of this book and these ideas is 100% a hill I will die on.”

“You read that right,” Ms. Shrier wrote in her op-ed. “Some in today’s ACLU favor book banning.”

She goes on to tell us about a woman named Grace Lavery, a professor of English at the University of California, Berkeley, who tweeted: “I DO encourage followers to steal Abigail Shrier’s book and burn it on a pyre.”

I’m sure I could find more examples of Leftists teying to stymie free speech and banning books. Also, let’s not forget colleges and universities across America allow students to shut down speeches and debates by Conservatives with regularity. This isn’t even an open secret; it’s encouraged by faculty and some administrators.

- Doc

Yes, I could see Democrats believing free speech doesn't extend to hate speech. Because it doesn't. It is why Clayton Bigsby's book "N***er Stain" would. Never be published.