Why do I get the impression 'appropriate measures' aren't explaining calmly & reasonably why the politicians & speakers supported are wrong? https://twitter.com/clairlemon/status/852828519281315842 …
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
If students don't like a college's values maybe they shouldn't go there.
Same argument for 'If you don't like America being a Christian country, leave.' No, better to fix problems than avoid them.
-
-
No, it's not the same argument. US or UK needs to be secular because of the variety of values. A college doesn't have to be secular.
-
Well, no, of course not. It can set itself up to be what it likes. However, if it is supposedly secular & traditionally committed to ...
-
...encouraging a diversity of ideas including challenging ones as universities have done & fails at this, people will try to fix it.
-
I think it's naive to say a college mustn't ban certain speakers or events. Student groups inviting hate-ists is problematic. A trojan horse
-
But 'hate-ists' is subjective. Almost no-one described that was intends to speak of hating people. Usually wrong kind of feminist.
-
Or an anti-feminist. Or someone who's done studies on IQ and race. Or a political conservative.
-
That statement banned ppl who supported politicians. Politicians. They're avoiding addressing ideas that are part of the political arena.
-
No Trojan horse. The ideas are already out there in society. They're just preventing the best educated ppl from learning to address them
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.