Posted on 02/21/2017 9:41:33 AM PST by C19fan
And the other one wants to nullify freedom of association
The Daily Texan has a curious way of choosing its editor-in-chief each year.
Candidates write editorials laying out their vision, and then UT-Austin students vote online to “weigh in” on who gets the position (it’s not clear what effect this vote has).
The two candidates for the term starting June 1 are Janhavi Nemawarkar and Laura Hallas, and while they have contrasting visions for the job, both fundamentally misunderstand what role the public university can legally play in regulating offensive speech.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecollegefix.com ...
No muslims allowed is a given, then.
Guess they’re dropping sports.
Not if hilLIAR had won
nother couple of years and we’ll be right where france is now:
“France passes law imposing up to two years prison for running pro-life websites”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3526403/posts
Who cares what the court says, if they make free speech illegal, we should all become criminals because we will be following the Constitution, not what some political hack judge has decreed from their ivory tower.
Who determines what a hostile view is?
Prior to January 2017, it was any article criticizing the President/
After Jan 2017, it is any article supporting the President.
HTH
Let me guess, pro-Trump editors need not apply.
And yet...eliminating free speech is hostile.
What he said.
I don’t care what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.