(11-29-2022, 04:47 PM)BostonCard Wrote: I agree with you. I would add, however, that the First Amendment protects people from having their speech curtailed by the government, not private organizations and that freedom of speech doesn't imply that everyone should be shielded from consequences of that speech. The question here is not so much about freedom of speech, but about whether the University should be heavy handed about its response to speech that offended some people (a religious minority to boot). I don't think the University should come down hard on the band, but I do think the band could do with some discussion about what topics are and are not appropriate targets for satire.
BC
Agree with both of the two comments. I’m pretty much a 1A absolutist. But the Constitution explicitly refers to government controls on speech. Stanford can do what they want. As consumers, we have the right to gripe, write to university officials, and many other forms of dissent. If Stanford choises to retaliate, that, too, is their choice.
(11-29-2022, 03:00 PM)CompSci87 Wrote: This thread is going south in a hurry. Can we drop it?
(No offense meant to Southerners.)
Improves down here.
