View Single Post
  #2621  
Old 10-21-2022, 08:45 AM
whell whell is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,135
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow View Post
What I have long since realized is that such long-winded responses are your way of obfuscating that you have (again) been proven wrong.

Your diatribe notwithstanding, the fact remains that conservatives falsely conflate societal shunning (or deplatforming by private companies) for their fascist, racist, misogynistic, anti-semitic and violent speech with First Amendment violations while cheering on actual First Amendment violations enacted repeatedly by their favorite politicians (e.g., DeSantis).

https://www.tampabay.com/opinion/202...rights-column/

https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment...irst-amendment

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/23/11008...ional-desantis

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pros...ry?id=88491658

https://theintercept.com/2022/04/23/...-dont-say-gay/
You've proven nothing. For example, from your MTSU link about the so-called "STOP Woke" act:

The law prohibits teaching or business practices that contend members of one ethnic group are inherently racist and should feel guilt for past actions committed by others. It also bars the notion that a person's status as privileged or oppressed is necessarily determined by race or gender, or that discrimination is acceptable to achieve diversity.

In practice, it would have given parents leverage to push back against the divisive and destructive of teaching of "inherent" racism. No one would deny racism exists. But to claim, much less to teach, that members of one ethnic group are somehow deficient or flawed is just as destructive as the racism that it intends to combat.

Further, if an employer took action against an employee if that employee publicly disagrees with the tenets of CRT, the law would have given an employee some measure of legal protection.

You can say what you want about the law being an attack on the First Amendment, but so is an environment where an individual or employee can be harmed of they make a statement or advance an opinion that is contrary to the State.

In an environment where the concept of separation of church and state is axiomatic, it seems to me that the State should not be in a position of pushing an ideology that is divisive and harmful.

By the way, I love how you refer to my point for point refutation of your weak post as a "diatribe". Hilarious!

Last edited by whell; 10-21-2022 at 08:47 AM.
Reply With Quote