Comments on: Is This What It’s Come To? http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/?p=7510 "The hobgoblin of little blogs." "A knack for taking the already disturbing and turning it into the abjectly ghastly." Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:50:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: Carlos http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/?p=7510#comment-46945 Carlos Sat, 25 Oct 2008 10:02:34 +0000 http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/?p=7510#comment-46945 I don't agree as there is a difference in not inviting someone or even resending an invitation to speak and those in a crowd disrupting a speaker through heckling or even violence or any other distraction. Looking at a person's history and deciding because of their own actions whether past or present in some way makes them an unworthy candidate to speak at an institution of higher learning is NOT limiting their free speech at all. It is using some sound judgment as a publicly funded institution and showing some ethics and even in this case some patriotic pride if you will. Bill Ayres is an unrepentant domestic terrorist and although I believe he should be in prison and not teaching anywhere in this country I also would not try to interfere with him speaking in public or private. That would be restricting free speech. No, the University made a good decision on behalf of the school and the citizens of the state that fund the University by not allowing someone who is maybe arguably an enemy of the state. I would expect the same if some foolish faculty member were to say invite Charlie Manson to speak on campus if he were by some horrible circumstance released from prison. (won't happen but just for the sake of argument) I think we could all agree that his rampage in the 60's killing several including Sharon Tate and her unborn child makes him a monster of historical proportions but I submit Bill Ayres is in the same league as Charles Manson by cowardly bombing buildings and killing innocent civilians as were the Oklahoma bombers killing men, women and children. I am glad he was canceled and hope more colleges will follow in suit. Remember this was not about his political persuasion or even the content of his speeches but rather his criminal record and background and even more so his lack of remorse for his crimes. If the did it because he was a conservative or liberal or even a communist I would tend to agree with you but that isn't the case here. JMHO I don’t agree as there is a difference in not inviting someone or even resending an invitation to speak and those in a crowd disrupting a speaker through heckling or even violence or any other distraction.
Looking at a person’s history and deciding because of their own actions whether past or present in some way makes them an unworthy candidate to speak at an institution of higher learning is NOT limiting their free speech at all. It is using some sound judgment as a publicly funded institution and showing some ethics and even in this case some patriotic pride if you will.
Bill Ayres is an unrepentant domestic terrorist and although I believe he should be in prison and not teaching anywhere in this country I also would not try to interfere with him speaking in public or private. That would be restricting free speech.
No, the University made a good decision on behalf of the school and the citizens of the state that fund the University by not allowing someone who is maybe arguably an enemy of the state.
I would expect the same if some foolish faculty member were to say invite Charlie Manson to speak on campus if he were by some horrible circumstance released from prison. (won’t happen but just for the sake of argument)
I think we could all agree that his rampage in the 60’s killing several including Sharon Tate and her unborn child makes him a monster of historical proportions but I submit Bill Ayres is in the same league as Charles Manson by cowardly bombing buildings and killing innocent civilians as were the Oklahoma bombers killing men, women and children.
I am glad he was canceled and hope more colleges will follow in suit.
Remember this was not about his political persuasion or even the content of his speeches but rather his criminal record and background and even more so his lack of remorse for his crimes. If the did it because he was a conservative or liberal or even a communist I would tend to agree with you but that isn’t the case here.

JMHO

]]> By: Carol http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/?p=7510#comment-45892 Carol Sun, 19 Oct 2008 01:01:11 +0000 http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/?p=7510#comment-45892 typing one-handed due to very snuggly kitty. anyway, i dont care how much it costs, but universities have got to put a stop to this crap on both sides. hire the security necessary to protect speakers, evict disruptive people from the hall until everyone learns some manners, do what is needed to re-civilize academia. only problem is, of course, getting the schools to actually behave impartially. and now that i have had time to think a bit more, by eliminating requirements for civility for one side, the schools did this to themselves, hung a big ol' kick me sign on their back. or, as it says in the book of hosea, they sow the wind and reap the whirlwind. i sincerely hope the schools did not expect a different result. typing one-handed due to very snuggly kitty.

anyway, i dont care how much it costs, but universities have got to put a stop to this crap on both sides. hire the security necessary to protect speakers, evict disruptive people from the hall until everyone learns some manners, do what is needed to re-civilize academia. only problem is, of course, getting the schools to actually behave impartially.

and now that i have had time to think a bit more, by eliminating requirements for civility for one side, the schools did this to themselves, hung a big ol’ kick me sign on their back.

or, as it says in the book of hosea, they sow the wind and reap the whirlwind. i sincerely hope the schools did not expect a different result.

]]>