NationStates Jolt Archive

A rather odd poll finds that most Americans know more about the Simsons, the cartoon family who's comedy and social commentary we all know and love, than about the freedoms guaranteed by the first ammendment.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11611015/

Which makes the next news story much less surprising, but still just as sad for our nation. A Harvard professor raised the question "Are the low numbers of women in the ranks of elite scientists and mathematicians accounted for by differences in brain structure between men and women?". He asked a question and was hissed off the stage by the oh so PC students who have lost sight of the freedoms guaranteed by the first ammendment. Apparently these people believe that unpopular speech should be silenced. Maybe they should be removed from Western Civilization and sent to join the mobs protesting in Pakistan.

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2006/032006/03012006/171568

I figure why bother learning them when most of them don't mean anything anymore anyway thanks to various administrations, gov't agencies and the courts.

The PC BOR should say:

Amendment I

Congress shall separate Church and State, and ensure that no public agency ever acknowledge the existence of religion. Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, except for such speech as is spoken by white males regarding women or minorities. Religion shall be defined as subjective belief systems with no basis in fact that involve rituals in a church or equivalent sacred area. Subjective belief systems with no basis in fact that do not perform rituals in a church-equivalent shall be the foundation of government policy.

I've seen studies like this before where they asked immigrants questions about our country and they asked average citizens the same questions and the imigrants got more answers right.

dont you love america? :rolleyes:

I've seen studies like this before where they asked immigrants questions about our country and they asked average citizens the same questions and the imigrants got more answers right.

dont you love america? :rolleyes:
I love it enough to point out it's problems in hopes someone will find a solution.

I love it enough to point out it's problems in hopes someone will find a solution.


Someday we will, but at this point it doesn't seem anytime soon.

Which makes the next news story much less surprising, but still just as sad for our nation. A Harvard professor raised the question "Are the low numbers of women in the ranks of elite scientists and mathematicians accounted for by differences in brain structure between men and women?". He asked a question and was hissed off the stage by the oh so PC students who have lost sight of the freedoms guaranteed by the first ammendment. Apparently these people believe that unpopular speech should be silenced. Maybe they should be removed from Western Civilization and sent to join the mobs protesting in Pakistan.

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2006/032006/03012006/171568
So you're saying that the Harvard professor was incapable of speaking after being hissed off the stage?

Dude, "freedom of speech" does not mean that every audience has to listen to you. Booing a bad stage act is not "silencing unpopular speech."

So you're saying that the Harvard professor was incapable of speaking after being hissed off the stage?

Dude, "freedom of speech" does not mean that every audience has to listen to you. Booing a bad stage act is not "silencing unpopular speech."
Sure it is. It was the man's turn to speak. If they didn't like what he was saying they should have walked out or made their comments at the appropriate time. When the president of the University is speaking on the university's stage he shouldn't be shouted down. It's similar to knocking down a radio station's broadcast antenna because you don't like what they're saying.

This is what happens when your education system isn't even a joke, it's a shadow of a joke.

Which makes the next news story much less surprising, but still just as sad for our nation. A Harvard professor raised the question "Are the low numbers of women in the ranks of elite scientists and mathematicians accounted for by differences in brain structure between men and women?". He asked a question and was hissed off the stage by the oh so PC students who have lost sight of the freedoms guaranteed by the first ammendment. Apparently these people believe that unpopular speech should be silenced. Maybe they should be removed from Western Civilization and sent to join the mobs protesting in Pakistan.


So you will protect free speech by banning booing?

So you will protect free speech by banning booing?
Boo at the end. That's the appropriate time. That way everyone gets his say.

Boo at the end. That's the appropriate time. That way everyone gets his say.

exactly, how can you make a judgement when you don't even give the speaker his/her chance?

It's impolite, but it's not a violation of free speech. It would be a far greater attack on free speech if booing was banned.

It's impolite, but it's not a violation of free speech. It would be a far greater attack on free speech if booing was banned.
Nobody said to ban booing, but if you do it while someone's trying to speak, especially someone who was scheduled to speak (in essence he owns the microphone and the podium for that period of time) it's comparable to intentionally sabotaging a newspaper's printing press in order to silence them temporarily. Boo at the end, that way everyone gets his say.

I said this last time a thread was up about the First Amendment and the Simpsons thing-the two bits of information do not relate, it tells me A)that people aren't familiar with classifying the First Amendment as "The Five Rights of the First Amendment" (it's not taught that way, so it makes sense that it would throw some people off. If asked about those five rights (like if we have them)I'm willing to bet that the numbers would be better. I'm not saying that it wouldn't be bad, but it wouldn't be this) and B) there are a lot of people familiar with a long running popular show that is a pop culture icon. The two bits of information do not reveal anything about the other.

For the second bit, I wonder when free speech started to evolve with people to freedom from criticism. Free speech is there to protect desent, not to make everyone listen to everyone else. And no, this is not like breaking a printing press or taking down a tower, that would be tearing down the podium and unpluging the speakers. This is just speech against speech.

Where is the article that says he was booed off? The article you link to is mostly just some guy ranting about how political correctness stands in opposition to Truth.

I said this last time a thread was up about the First Amendment and the Simpsons thing-the two bits of information do not relate, it tells me A)that people aren't familiar with classifying the First Amendment as "The Five Rights of the First Amendment" (it's not taught that way, so it makes sense that it would throw some people off. If asked about those five rights (like if we have them)I'm willing to bet that the numbers would be better. I'm not saying that it wouldn't be bad, but it wouldn't be this) and B) there are a lot of people familiar with a long running popular show that is a pop culture icon. The two bits of information do not reveal anything about the other.

For the second bit, I wonder when free speech started to evolve with people to freedom from criticism. Free speech is there to protect desent, not to make everyone listen to everyone else. And no, this is not like breaking a printing press or taking down a tower, that would be tearing down the podium and unpluging the speakers. This is just speech against speech.

It's not speech against speech. Here's a better analogy. Let's say I disagree with Rush Limbaugh. Should I be allowed to build a device that interferes with his radio signal so nobody can hear him? Of course not. I should express my disagreement in the appropriate fashion at the appropriate time. Same with these punk kids. They should, if they disagree, boo at the end, debate the guy, write some letters to the school paper, but not try to silence him with useless noise.

A rather odd poll finds that most Americans know more about the Simsons, the cartoon family who's comedy and social commentary we all know and love, than about the freedoms guaranteed by the first ammendment.

Do they "know" that those freedoms are what lets the terrorists win?

It's not speech against speech. Here's a better analogy. Let's say I disagree with Rush Limbaugh. Should I be allowed to build a device that interferes with his radio signal so nobody can hear him? Of course not. I should express my disagreement in the appropriate fashion at the appropriate time. Same with these punk kids. They should, if they disagree, boo at the end, debate the guy, write some letters to the school paper, but not try to silence him with useless noise.
Still not a good analogy, and still not an issue of freedom of speech but rather courtesy.

Where is the article that says he was booed off? The article you link to is mostly just some guy ranting about how political correctness stands in opposition to Truth.
You're right. I hastily skimmed the article and confused two separate incidents with each other. In fact it's much worse. Harvard's PC faculty have kicked him out five years into his tenure.