Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (167948)	4/16/2003 5:30:35 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1594917

How quiet do you think a very conservative Rep. audience would remain if I were to starting speaking of allowing abortions up til the third trimester and taking all the guns away from private citizens etc.? A lot of them wouldn't be so noisy that they would prevent the speech from happening. Those that would be so loud and would intrude on to the speech should be handled by security or police. In any case the original point that started this whole line of discussion was not that Republicans don't seek to censor or shout down but rather that they where not alone in this. All sides in politics want to make the other side shut up. There is a time and place for loud shouts and denunciation, and a time when differing opinions should have a chance to get heard. An appropriate protest would be to be at the speech and then to turn your back and walk out when he is starting to talk. Or you could get the school to allow someone who disagrees with the speaker to talk after him, or march outside the speech with protest signs. I find it unfortunate that people from all over the political spectrum , yes including conservatives, but also including liberals and others want to silence dissent from their dogma rather then listening to it, debating it, refuting it, or at worst just avoiding it but letting others listen. Sorry, big difference between speaking and getting booed down, and not being allowed to speak at all. If you get booed but people can hear you anyway then there is a big difference. If no one can hear you then there isn't one. I don't give a hoot if the H of F is private.....if it is at all..........its unAmerican to exclude someone from a key event becuase you don't like who he voted for for president. I'm not sure how you reconcile that statement with "And if you choose to walk into the opposition's camp......that you have to expect some serious objections." Should the NRA invite Clinton to its next annual meeting? Should NARAL ask the Pope to give the keynote speech next time they meet? If they don't would they be un-American? Sure the HoF is not officially a political organization but neither is Berkeley. I don't really think that the HoF made the best decision in their case but I also don't think it should be called un-American. Some friends in San Diego just had the back window of their car smashed in because they were flying the peace flag just below the American flag. Great message being sent to their kids. And how is this any different from early 1930's Germany?. Frankly, its the conservatives who are noted for stopping dissent in this fashion, not the liberals. All sides do. The liberals proclaim their tolerance but they are just as intolerant as anyone else. The issues of slavery and affirmative action as presented by the people in your links can be very offensive It wasn't the issue of slavery. Its the issue of throwing billions of dollars at people who where never slaves, after taking it from people who have never owned slaves, and in many cases didn't even have ancestors who owned slaves, or who had ancestors that died to free the slaves. But fine lets say they are offended by it. I'm offended by the idea that I should have to pay reparations but I don't try to make the people who say we should shut up. If you argued for reparations I would try to counter your argument with my arguments not try to hack in to SI to delete your posts or push people to put you on ignore, or even put you on ignore myself. If people are going to be so easily offended that saying reparations are not a good idea, is not just (in their opinion) an incorrect and wrong headed idea, but horribly offensive, racist, and beyond the pale, then the problem lies with them. They are too touchy. If calling a convicted murderer a murderer is not just something that they don't like but rather an idea that has to be shut up, then you have a major case of close mindedness and intolerance. If anything outside a narrow range of extremist viewpoints is offensive to someone then they have a problem. And yes their are conservatives who do the same thing. My point is not to bash liberals but to bash close mindedness. Tim