To: fanfan
Dont get me wrong, there are plenty of examples of stupid and offensive ideas out there, and Im all for confronting those who express those ideas, but any confrontation ought to be spontaneous and it ought to be limited to truly private individuals rather than agents of the state posing as private individuals. That is what I object to, and what Queens students should be outraged by. Dont think that the experiment will end with interrupted conversations either. Eventually someone will resist the counsel of a student facilitator by telling them to take a hike, probably in words that will themselves be offensive. What will happen then? Will the student facilitator simply respect the right of his interlocutor to have a different opinion and desist, or will the offender be subject to further investigation and sanction, perhaps even expulsion? The stench of "Big Brother" is all over this.
6 posted on
11/24/2008 12:00:55 PM PST by
Captain Rhino
(The best way to calm the delusions of grandeur in the energy cartel is to stop needing their energy)
To: Captain Rhino; Cindy; All
FR-RelatedSection 13, the controversial hate speech provision in the Canadian Human Rights Act, should be repealed, according to an independent review by University of Windsor law professor Richard Moon.
8 posted on
11/24/2008 12:08:40 PM PST by
fanfan
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson