Interview: Professor Says He Won't Back Down From Sept. 11 Comments, but Is Weary of Fight

Churchill has his First Amendment right of free speech, but what about the rights of people who don't want to pay his salary from tax dollars? Don't those people have rights too?

Freedom of speech isn't a one way street. If you take other people's money you're obliged to watch your mouth.

OK, for a professor, a supposedly educated man, his choice of words in the essay was simply 'dumb'. It was a very poor judgment call on his behalf to word his point the way he did. If he would have explained his point as he did in the interview article, this would not be a discussion topic. I definitely do not agree with him.

However, what you have said above about tax dollars is completely ludicrous. "obliged to watch your mouth"? That's like saying, "You work for Ford Motor Company. Ford pays your salary. Don't ever bad mouth Ford. And God forbid you ever drive a Chevy. You are 'obliged' to back Ford." The same thing happened recently when a beer company employee was caught in a newspaper ad drinking a rival beer and was fired. This country gives you the freedom of choice. This country gives you the right to speak freely. Choose your words carefully.

There are many things I don't like my tax dollars going toward, but people still are entitled to their own opinion, as you are entitled to yours. What makes his opinion any more right/wrong than yours? Nothing. Because it is simply that, an opinion. So, feel free to agree/disagree with it, but don't claim that he is 'obliged' to do anything. Free opinions have no restrictions, only consequences.

The people of Colorado should sue Churchill for all the money he has made from the public till, since the inception of his fraudulent claims.

In a more fair world we would. As it is, we are going to be glad to be rid of him. As long as he's in the spotlight as he's been, I don't mind paying his salary. The damage he's doing to CU and the leftists in general is more than worth it.

As soon as he drops out of the limelight, it's time to fire him.

This country gives you the right to speak freely. Choose your words carefully.

I've chosen my words very carefully, and the First Amendment gives all of us the right to speak our mind. But, you're saying that it's a one way street, with no responsibility taken for what one says.

I'm saying that I don't want to pay Churchill's salary with my tax dollars. That's my opinion, it's my right to say that, and it's my right to tell politicians that I strongly disagree with where my tax dollars are going.

Free opinions have no restrictions, ...

Of course they do. Wherever you got the idea that a man can say what he wants, anyplace, and any time, is fantasy - not reality. Common sense usually tells people that they don't tick off the people who pay their salaries. In other words "they watch their mouths" around the people who sign their checks. This is common practice in private business, and it's no different in the public sector.

If Churchill was in private practice I'd have to problem with what he said no matter how much I dislike it. However, once a man puts his hand out for federal funds he's obligated, by common decency, to show respect for where those funds came from. If he doesn't I have every right to ask that his taxpayer's funding be stopped.

Free opinions have no restrictions, ...
Of course they do. Common sense usually tells people that they don't tick off the people who pay their salaries...

The "..." that you took out of my post was "only consequences." As I said before, you should NEVER be restricted on what you say, ever. You have to be willing to accept the "Consequences" that come from the words you use in the situation you're in. You are saying, "If it's anything negative about the people that pay your bills, keep your mouth shut. Period." I'm saying, "If you believe something is wrong, you are free to speak your mind, let the world know. Right or wrong, accept the consequences of your words."

However, once a man puts his hand out for federal funds he's obligated, by common decency, to show respect for where those funds came from.

Common decency and common sense are not common to everyone, and obviously not Churchill. But again, if you feel that the people that pay your salary have not earned your respect, then you should not respect for decency sake (See Enron, Worldcomm, Tyco, etc...) If someone in the know, brings any of these scandals to light earlier, people's entire livelihood could have been saved. Just accept the Consequences that come along with standing up for what you believe, right or wrong.

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.