• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Should there be consequences for PACs that don't stand up for free speech?

jhmd2000 said:
Cal would never have extended this invite if they had this to run with. They were looking for any convenient excuse to cancel this speech. The revisionism I.T.T. is impressive.
Click to expand...

The College Republicans at Berkeley were looking for any convenient excuse to bring an inflammatory speaker on campus. I'd imagine most republicans don't actually agree with the shit he says, they just like how he pisses off liberals and reveals their hypocrisy.
 
wakephan09 said:
The College Republicans at Berkeley were looking for any convenient excuse to bring an inflammatory speaker on campus. I'd imagine most republicans don't actually agree with the shit he says, they just like how he pisses off liberals and reveals their hypocrisy.
Click to expand...

This is absolutely correct.
 
MysteryMen said:
I get the distinction, but it would be pretty hypocritical for an organization consisting largely of people who criticized the university for canceling the same person to do themselves and then try justify it on the grounds that they're a private organization.

Or maybe you disagree?

Also the wholly different information thing is BS. It was pretty easy to tell that Milo was a scumbag before this came out.
Click to expand...

You're just going to skip over this jhmd?
 
MysteryMen said:
You're just going to skip over this jhmd?
Click to expand...

I just sort of assumed you knew that "supporting pedophilia" is in fact wholly different from "trolls Dems" and were just playing make believe. It was so far from plausible as not to warrant serious comment.
 
MysteryMen said:
You're just going to skip over this jhmd?
Click to expand...

Give him a break. He just had to admit that he knew that it wasn't Cal that invited him to speak on campus, ruining one of his main talking points. You can only take so many Ls per day
 
jhmd2000 said:
I just sort of assumed you knew that "supporting pedophilia" is in fact wholly different from "trolls Dems" and were just playing make believe. It was so far from plausible as not to warrant serious comment.
Click to expand...

Just so we are clear...you admit that there are times that things go too far, and there is a line for what should and should not be said/given a platform? We just disagree with where that line is.

Overt racism, sexism, and supporting white supremacy are fine, but supporting pedophilia is not alright in your mind?

How would you rationalize your POV to somebody who says that supporting pedophilia is fine and you are stepping on their free speech?
 
Deacsfan27 said:
Just so we are clear...you admit that there are times that things go too far, and there is a line for what should and should not be said/given a platform? We just disagree with where that line is.

Overt racism, sexism, and supporting white supremacy are fine, but supporting pedophilia is not alright in your mind?

How would you rationalize your POV to somebody who says that supporting pedophilia is fine and you are stepping on their free speech?
Click to expand...

Examples would be nice. What if there was a fact behind these serious accusations? He was trolling you guys. Don't be so easily baited. Please be smart enough to know the difference.
 
I kind of get what Milo was trying to say, in general: that it's difficult for gay kids to have the kind of clumsy, experimental sexual encounters that straight kids get to have as teenagers. That's why gay kids that don't know how to explain their desires or act on them might seek out experienced and confident older partners.

However the solution for this is clearly not promoting pederasty or pedophilia, but instead normalizing gay relationships, making it easy for gay couples to adopt, making gay marriage socially acceptable. Unfortunately the dude is a provocateur and not very smart, so he comes off instead as a child rapist.
 
jhmd2000 said:
Examples would be nice. What if there was a fact behind these serious accusations? He was trolling you guys. Don't be so easily baited. Please be smart enough to know the difference.
Click to expand...

So hate speech of that nature is acceptable if somebody is "trolling"?
 
jhmd2000 said:
Examples would be nice. What if there was a fact behind these serious accusations? He was trolling you guys. Don't be so easily baited. Please be smart enough to know the difference.
Click to expand...

JHMD, the guy is definitely a sexist and overtly anti-feminist. He might very well be trolling when it comes to issues of race and white supremacy, but even trolling can be extremely dangerous (as his touring title suggests) when he's given the kind of platform to actually change people's minds. There are real and harmful consequences to his speech. I honestly don't think that you agree with any of the shit he spouts, but even by enjoying his trolling you're kind of supporting his message.
 
wakephan09 said:
JHMD, the guy is definitely a sexist and overtly anti-feminist. He might very well be trolling when it comes to issues of race and white supremacy, but even trolling can be extremely dangerous (as his touring title suggests) when he's given the kind of platform to actually change people's minds. There are real and harmful consequences to his speech. I honestly don't think that you agree with any of the shit he spouts, but even by enjoying his trolling you're kind of supporting his message.
Click to expand...

No "kind of" about it. People like jh shouldn't be give a pass when they defend hate speech. They are just as scummy as Milo and the board and society would be a better place without then.
 
For those that saw milos on Maher this weekend i highly urge you to find the 12 minute "overtime" segment. Highly entertaining. the two panel black dudes went off on that bro.
 
DistrictDeacon said:
No "kind of" about it. People like jh shouldn't be give a pass when they defend hate speech. They are just as scummy as Milo and the board and society would be a better place without then.
Click to expand...

Wow you are even softer than I had given you lack of credit for. FragileRock. The fact that you still don't get that Milo was baiting you---after you took the bait---is pretty amazing. I'm sure he's grateful for his career.
 
Last edited:
Deacsfan27 said:
So hate speech of that nature is acceptable if somebody is "trolling"?
Click to expand...

Trolling is trolling. I find it very hard to believe that you guys are so very afraid of this caricature (he's so clearly playing a role that apparently was just irresistible for you guys, proving his point, incidentally) that you wanted to ban him, the very thing he was asking for. This is the part that is so amazing to me. Not that he got the attention he sought (that's easy), that he was able to outsmart so many people on the left.
 
jhmd2000 said:
Trolling is trolling. I find it very hard to believe that you guys are so very afraid of this caricature (he's so clearly playing a role that apparently was just irresistible for you guys, proving his point, incidentally) that you wanted to ban him, the very thing he was asking for. This is the part that is so amazing to me. Not that he got the attention he sought (that's easy), that he was able to outsmart so many people on the left.
Click to expand...

I'm not "afraid" in the least, but if we have learned literally ANYTHING over the past two years, it's that people have a really, really hard time differentiating between literally what's real and what's not.

Do I think Milo is sincere at all? Absolutely not. Are there people out there who hear what he has to say on that platform and wholeheartedly agree with him because they don't know that he is just "trolling people on the left"? Yes, there are a ton of them.
 
jhmd2000 said:
I just sort of assumed you knew that "supporting pedophilia" is in fact wholly different from "trolls Dems" and were just playing make believe. It was so far from plausible as not to warrant serious comment.
Click to expand...

I don't understand your answer. It is or is not hypocrisy for the conservatives who make up CPAC to ban Milo after they blasted universities for doing the same (when there were actual safety concerns that presumably could be mitigated at CPAC!)?
 
DistrictDeacon said:
No "kind of" about it. People like jh shouldn't be give a pass when they defend hate speech. They are just as scummy as Milo and the board and society would be a better place without then.
Click to expand...

Hush. Adults are talking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top