Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Gonzaga to allow Shapiro Speech

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by thespywhozaggedme View Post
    Quick question; are "hateful beliefs" simply things that you disagree with or can you give concrete examples of things that you don't agree with socially that are not "hateful"? Thanks
    After doing a little research, I too would like to know your thoughts in this.

    Comment


    • #48
      I am not seeing a lot of hate in these. In a heated twitter argument, people will say things in a course manner. That is why when Bush or Obama had gaffes, I generally chalked it up to public speaking all day. Donald Trump I chalk up to being Donald Trump. If Shapiro was calling for the elimination of the Jews or saying something like one minority group is sub human, I could see that. Oh wait, Alt right neonazis and Louis Farrakhan already do that. My bad.

      BTW, gender dysphoria was listed as a mental illness until recently. I work with one Transgender person. Says the transition was a huge mistake and wants to go back. Unfortunately the damage was done. Feel so bad for that person. Compassion is the key.

      All I can say is if a friend or family member came to me and said they wanted to transition, I would try and be as compassionate as possible. However, I would also recommend they seek serious physiological help to figure out when and how these feelings were triggered. For a grown man or woman to decide they are the opposite sex is not normal. It just isn’t. There is no shame in speaking to a counselor before making a life altering and physically demanding choice.

      Comment


      • #49
        This rounds up a lot (but not all) of the reasons I don't take him seriously as an "intellectual" or any sort of moral voice.

        https://static.currentaffairs.org/20...ds-philosopher
        History has its eyes on you.

        Sage of the GU Message Board

        Comment


        • #50
          Originally posted by thespywhozaggedme View Post
          Quick question; are "hateful beliefs" simply things that you disagree with or can you give concrete examples of things that you don't agree with socially that are not "hateful"? Thanks
          I still am waiting for an Answer to this.

          Comment


          • #51
            He will just sing to the choir ….they only people that will take him seriously are the people who hold the same views....

            Comment


            • #52
              Originally posted by Virginia Zags Fan View Post
              I still am waiting for an Answer to this.
              I'm purposefully avoiding making this a bigger discussion than what it already is.

              If you don't feel statements such as these are hateful I'm not sure we are going to agree with much.

              "Israelis like to build. Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage. This is not a difficult issue. #settlementsrock"

              "Trayvon Martin would have turned 21 today if he hadn't taken a man's head and beaten it on the pavement before being shot."

              Him opening his Berkley speech with stuff like this, (as quoted in the earlier pinion piece posted) doesn't strike me as a voice that needs to be promoted by the University. He's a blowhard and the only reason he was asked to speak was for this exact controversy.

              Toward the beginning, he addressed Antifa protesters, whom he called “communist pieces of garbage”: “You guys are so stupid… you can all go to hell, you pathetic, lying, stupid jackasses.” According to the Times, there is a wide gulf between Trump/Yiannopoulos-style vulgar conservatism and Shapiro-style Logical conservatism, but I just am not sure that I see in “Go to hell, you communist piece of garbage” the kind of “polemical brilliance” that Shapiro is reputed to demonstrate. The rest of the speech, when it got beyond making Botox jokes about Nancy Pelosi, was strong on insults (“pusillanimous cowards,” “hard-Left morons,” “uncivilized barbarians”) and light on actual argumentation and substantive factual claims. Shapiro did say that the alt-right are full of “bull####” and that the left overstates the threat posed by Shapiro’s speeches. (Both true.) The main thrust of the speech, though, is that America is the greatest country in the world, that there are no real injustices facing black people, women, and poor people, and that if you don’t do well economically here it’s entirely your fault. As he says:

              This country is an amazing place full of opportunity. Nobody, by and large, cares enough about you to stop you from achieving your dreams. That includes you, people who are shouting out there in the audience. No one cares about you; get over yourselves. I don’t care about you; no one cares about you…That means, in a free country, if you fail, it’s probably your own fault.

              Comment


              • #53
                Going to say a few things and move on.

                1) GU should allow almost anyone to speak... conservative/liberal whatever... but not one that espouses hate. Based on the logic I am seeing here... Hitler would have to have been allowed to speak.
                2) Most here complaining about him not speaking would probably complain about a very liberal speaker... so there is probably a bit of hypocrisy going on.
                3) This is a blatant attempt by the inviting group at playing "Gotcha" with GU. I don't see it as anything more than that. As others have said, there are plenty of conservative thinkers they could have invited
                "And Morrison? He did what All-Americans do. He shot daggers in the daylight and stole a win." - Steve Kelley (Seattle Times)

                "Gonzaga is a special place, with special people!" - Dan Dickau #21

                Foo me once shame on you, Foo me twice shame on me.

                2012 Foostrodamus - Foothsayer of Death

                Comment


                • #54
                  Ben Shapiros views have been spewed across colleges campuses and YouTube for years...nothing new.

                  Invite someone like Camille Paglia or Jordan Peterson deep thinkers imo.

                  https://spectator.us/camille-paglia-hillary-trump/

                  Comment


                  • #55
                    Originally posted by bartruff1 View Post
                    He will just sing to the choir ….they only people that will take him seriously are the people who hold the same views....
                    That's a very disheartening p.o.v. It tells me that you only take seriously those that share the same belief system as you. What ever happened to listening to all perspectives and then drawing a well reasoned conclusion instead of immediately discounting someone simply because they have an opinion that differs from your own?

                    Comment


                    • #56
                      Originally posted by LongIslandZagFan View Post
                      Going to say a few things and move on.

                      1) GU should allow almost anyone to speak... conservative/liberal whatever... but not one that espouses hate. Based on the logic I am seeing here... Hitler would have to have been allowed to speak. Comparing a jew to Hitler is despicable, shame on you.
                      2) Most here complaining about him not speaking would probably complain about a very liberal speaker... so there is probably a bit of hypocrisy going on. Nope, I believe in letting all voices be heard, especially those that I disagree with. Anyone can be tolerant of those that share the same point of view, where;'s the nobility in that?
                      3) This is a blatant attempt by the inviting group at playing "Gotcha" with GU. I don't see it as anything more than that. As others have said, there are plenty of conservative thinkers they could have invited. Why is it your business to tell people who they want to hear speak? That's seems pretty intolerant of you.

                      My answers in red. Gotta admit, I'm pretty disappointed in your post. I think I'll just stick to basketball. Sigh

                      Comment


                      • #57
                        Originally posted by Kong-Kool-Aid View Post
                        I'm purposefully avoiding making this a bigger discussion than what it already is.

                        If you don't feel statements such as these are hateful I'm not sure we are going to agree with much.

                        "Israelis like to build. Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage. This is not a difficult issue. #settlementsrock"

                        "Trayvon Martin would have turned 21 today if he hadn't taken a man's head and beaten it on the pavement before being shot."

                        Him opening his Berkley speech with stuff like this, (as quoted in the earlier pinion piece posted) doesn't strike me as a voice that needs to be promoted by the University. He's a blowhard and the only reason he was asked to speak was for this exact controversy.

                        Toward the beginning, he addressed Antifa protesters, whom he called “communist pieces of garbage”: “You guys are so stupid… you can all go to hell, you pathetic, lying, stupid jackasses.” According to the Times, there is a wide gulf between Trump/Yiannopoulos-style vulgar conservatism and Shapiro-style Logical conservatism, but I just am not sure that I see in “Go to hell, you communist piece of garbage” the kind of “polemical brilliance” that Shapiro is reputed to demonstrate. The rest of the speech, when it got beyond making Botox jokes about Nancy Pelosi, was strong on insults (“pusillanimous cowards,” “hard-Left morons,” “uncivilized barbarians”) and light on actual argumentation and substantive factual claims. Shapiro did say that the alt-right are full of “bull####” and that the left overstates the threat posed by Shapiro’s speeches. (Both true.) The main thrust of the speech, though, is that America is the greatest country in the world, that there are no real injustices facing black people, women, and poor people, and that if you don’t do well economically here it’s entirely your fault. As he says:

                        This country is an amazing place full of opportunity. Nobody, by and large, cares enough about you to stop you from achieving your dreams. That includes you, people who are shouting out there in the audience. No one cares about you; get over yourselves. I don’t care about you; no one cares about you…That means, in a free country, if you fail, it’s probably your own fault.
                        Context is key. Some of those statements I agree with, some I do not, but what is the context? Besides, so what if you're offended? Nothing happens to you, you don't get permanent diarrhea or grow a 3rd thumb if someone offends you. You don't have a right to not be offended. You do have a right to not care for what someone is saying, but the amount of hubris that it takes to tell someone else what they should be allowed to listen to, or how they should think borders on fascistic behavior.

                        Comment


                        • #58
                          By the way, this is my last post in this thread. I'm so despondent by the fact that so many posters that I like in the bball forum are so intolerant of divergent opinion really makes me think what kind of a future there will be for my young girls. If they refuse to think, act, speak and vote a certain way will they be branded with a scarlet letter "C"? Voltaire would be rolling over in his grave. sigh

                          Comment


                          • #59
                            Well, I am not despondent ...but I do have diarrhea …..sad...

                            The students have a right to hear who they want to speak....if is hubris to tell them who they should want to hear...what nonsense...

                            I will add that I would also support ANY liberal that was invited to speak..
                            Last edited by bartruff1; 12-05-2018, 09:35 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #60
                              Originally posted by Once and Future Zag View Post
                              This rounds up a lot (but not all) of the reasons I don't take him seriously as an "intellectual" or any sort of moral voice.

                              https://static.currentaffairs.org/20...ds-philosopher
                              Without agreeing or disagreeing with your assessment here, why would this be relevant criteria for denying a campus club the right to host him?

                              I'm simply interested in the principle as it ought to be applied in your view, as though behind a veil of ignorance regarding the specific club and specific speaker. What kind of standard would you suggest the University use toward a student club (in this case the College Republicans) in allowing or vetoing speakers? Obviously there are all kinds of hosted speakers who might talk about athletics, recreation, tech, travel, etc who wouldn't be described (even by themselves) as serious moral or intellectual voices.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X