Tag Archives: freedom of speech

A university declares its stand for freedom

Good news: The University of Chicago has issued a letter that it is distributing to all incoming students that bluntly tells them it does not care if they are offended by some speech and will instead support the speaker’s free speech.

“Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called ‘trigger warnings,’ we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual ‘safe spaces’ where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own,” reads the letter from Dean of Students Jay Ellison.

You can read the full letter at the link. Whether this will translate into freedom of speech for both liberal and conservative speakers remains to be seen. This college has had several incidents recently where protesters prevented speakers from speaking. The university’s response was to refuse to discipline the protesters for their disruptions, thus allowing the heckler’s veto to win.

Trump rally attendees sue San Jose

Fourteen attendees of a San Jose Trump rally on June 2 have filed a class-action suit against the city, the mayor, and the police chief for their failure to protect them from rioters.

“Law-abiding citizens leaving the Trump rally were victimized by being forced by armed police to walk into a riot in full swing where many were assaulted while police looked on,” said the plaintiffs’ attorney, Harmeet K. Dhillon, who is also the vice chair of the California Republican Party.

Dhillon says her clients range from a 14-year-old who was assaulted by two different individuals and denied assistance by the San Jose Fire Department to a 71-year-old woman whose glasses were ripped off and destroyed by three rioters. She said it was made clear that the “inaction” of 250 San Jose police officers “was colored by political viewpoint considerations.”

As documented at the time, the San Jose police actually arranged things so that the Trump supporters were forced to take a detour that would put them directly in the path of the violent protesters, and then stood down and watched them get attacked.

I hope they win big, and bankrupt the mayor and the police chief.

California university backs down and reinstates conservative organization

Good news: After attempting to ban the college Republican student organization for a year because the administration didn’t like its conservative views, the University of California-Irvine was confronted with so much outrage, from both the right and the left, that it has been forced to back down and reinstate the organization.

The decision followed backlash from conservatives and liberals at UC Irvine and elsewhere. In addition to scathing reports from conservative and libertarian media, the President of the Holyoke College Republicans, Kassy Dillon, slammed UCI for their “insult to every College Republican across the country” in an op-ed for Breitbart.

Left-wingers on campus also came out in support of their rivals’ right to free speech. In a rare display of bipartisan unity at the campus grassroots, the group for Bernie Sanders supporters at UCI issued a statement condemning the administration for “repeated mistreatment of political organizations that take part in open discourse on campus” and calling for the restoration of the College Republicans’ right to access college facilities.

In a comment to Breitbart Tech, Ariana Rowlands, President of the UC Irvine College Republicans, said she did not intend to let the matter rest. “This complete revocation of the suspension placed on College Republicans is a big win for free speech and for free assembly, but also a victory for other clubs that go through the same type of administrative bias such as the Jewish, Bernie Sanders, and conservative clubs on our campus.”

To me, the big news here is that the leftists on campus came to the support of the conservatives, even though they disagree on almost all issues. Freedom of speech, however, appears to be something they do, and should, agree on.

UC-Irving bans Republican club for a year

Leftwing fascists: The administration of the University of California-Irving has suspended the student Republican club for a year because it didn’t like their political activism.

The UC Irvine Republicans have been suspended for an entire year after they informed the administration of their plans to schedule another event on campus withBreitbart senior editor Milo Yiannopoulos.

Nearly a month after their initial event with Milo, entitled “Social Justice is Cancer,” the College Republicans were asked to attend a debriefing with the Director of Student Life & Leadership, Darlene Esparza, and Associate Dean of Students, Sherwynn Umali, to discuss the planning process of the event. During the meeting, College Republican President Ariana Rowlands raised the possibility of Milo’s return to campus.

Just four hours after the meeting, a UCI administrator sent the group an email to inform them they had suspended the club for an entire year.

Posted from fascist California, a liberal dominated state where free speech is okay as long as you only express leftwing opinions.

California moves to criminalize journalism

Fascists: Democrats in the California legislature are pushing a bill that would criminalize undercover videos of healthcare providers like Planned Parenthood.

Hey, who says we need a first amendment or a Bill of Rights? We instead have elected Democrats to protect us, including the guy who introduced this bill and who has received $13,500 in campaign contributions from Planned Parenthood. Why should we worry?

More violent protests against Trump

Brownshirts: Waving Mexican flags anti-Trump protesters at a Trump rally in California today threw objects and started fires, with a number getting arrested.

There was a very strong police presence, which appears to have contained the violence. More details here, which describes the protests in more detail, including one story of a Trump protester throwing an egg at Trump supporter.

Protesting Trump is fine. Trying to suppress a Trump rally with violence is not. To me it appears that the only thing that prevented these anti-Trump protesters from getting out of control was the police.

Students win lawsuit against university speech restrictions

Victory for free speech: Students at Dixie State University in Utah have won their lawsuit against the university’s attempt to outlaw their freedom of speech.

Students whose flyers were censored by Dixie State University in St. George, Utah, won their First Amendment lawsuit Thursday—on Constitution Day—when a settlement was reached restoring students’ rights to free speech. Three students filed the lawsuit after their flyers, with unflattering depictions of President Obama, former President George W. Bush, and Cuban revolutionary Che Guevara, were banned by the university. Dixie State claimed no flyers that “mock” or “disparage” individuals were allowed.

As part of Thursday’s settlement, Dixie State agreed to revise campus policies to meet First Amendment standards. These include the university’s unconstitutional flyer approval process, posting policies, club event policies, and “free speech zone” policy. The university also must pay $50,000 in damages and attorney’s fees and provide training to administrators on the campus’ new speech policies. [Emphasis mine]

The broad speech rules set by the university were so vague that they literally could ban any speech they didn’t like, which they then did. This is the typical behavior of a fascist. I am also sure that they would be offended by my characterization of them as fascists, and would try to shut me up for doing so. Also the behavior of a fascist.

Read it all. The story demonstrates again that if people are willing to stand up against this leftwing state religion, they can win.

Doctor fired for daring to disagree with homosexual agenda

Fascists: A Boston doctor has been expelled from the staff of the hospital because he expressed opinions disagreeing with the homosexual lifestyle while noting the negative health effects of that lifestyle.

Recently, Dr. Church was expelled from the staff of BIDMC after he posted  medical concerns about the dangerous practices of homosexual behavior, also two Bible verses, on the hospital’s internal Internet portal. The hospital did not dispute the truth of Dr. Church’s statements, nor claim that he ever discussed these matters with patients. But they stated that his concerns constitute “discrimination,” “harassment,” and “unprofessional conduct” and may not be discussed.

I normally do not object when private organizations or businesses fire someone, even if I believe that firing to be wrong. What strikes me about this expulsion is the political agenda behind it. The doctor was fired because he dared disagree when the hospital became an aggressive advocate for the homosexual lifestyle and political agenda. He didn’t take his disagreement to patients, and in fact continued to treat homosexual patients without bias. All he was doing was expressing his disagreement of the hospital’s advocacy within the private hospital communications network. Be sure and read the timeline of this story, which outlines what happened in great detail, going back to 2011. It even describes the double standard of the hospital, telling him to shut up because he was offending homosexuals but continuing to send him pro-gay email flyers even though he asked to be removed from the emailing list because those flyers offended him.

This story thus illustrates starkly the lengths in which the liberal, leftwing community, not just homosexuals, will go to stifle any opposing opinions. It shows again that the freedom to speak your mind in modern America is very much threatened, because it isn’t a small minority that believes freedom of speech should be squelched, but a very significant percentage, possibly a majority.

Here’s another example, in California. This fascist attitude aimed at shutting down any speech that the left disagrees with is growing and becoming downright dangerous.

Wisconsin Supreme Court declares illegal Democratic SWAT team raids on conservatives

Wisconsin Supreme Court has ruled that the Democratic Party investigations and SWAT team raids on conservatives were illegal and “unsupported in either reason or law.”

As the court noted,

The special prosecutor has disregarded the vital principle that in our nation and our state political speech is a fundamental right and is afforded the highest level of protection. The special prosecutor’s theories, rather than ‘assur[ing] [the] unfettered interchange of ideas for the bringing about of political and social changes desired by the people’ . . . instead would assure that such political speech will be investigated with paramilitary-style home invasions conducted in the pre-dawn hours and then prosecuted and punished.

In other words, the Democrats in Wisconsin, disliking the fact that Republicans and Scott Walker had legally won elections and were publicly criticizing them, tried to shut their opponents up by using the power of the government to literally destroy them. It is important to repeat exactly what they did:

On October 3, 2013, multiple Wisconsin conservatives were awakened by a persistent pounding on the door, their houses were illuminated by floodlights, and police — sometimes with guns drawn — poured into their homes. Once inside, the investigators turned the private residences of these innocent conservative citizens “upside down,” seeking an extraordinarily broad range of documents and information. These raids were supplemented by subpoenas that secured for investigators massive amounts of electronic information.

This is the behavior of storm-troopers and tyrants. Thankfully, the court in Wisconsin has now forcibly agreed, and declared these actions fundamentally wrong.

This ruling means that the lawsuits against the Democratic prosecutor and everyone who was involved in these abusive investigations and raids will go forward with great vigor.

Supreme Court voids local sign ordiance

Some good news: In a 9-0 ruling the Supreme Court struck down a local Arizona town’s ordiance that restricted a church’s right to post signs about its upcoming events.

What is most encouraging about this ruling is that all nine justices agreed to it. This suggests that there is a strong majority on the court that supports freedom of speech, and will not look kindly at the Obama administration’s effort to impose its will on the speech and activity of religious and conservative organizations.

Judge rules the arrest of a citizen during a local meeting illegal

The first amendment is such an inconvenient thing: A judge has dismissed criminal charges filed against a man who was arrested 40 seconds into his five minute allotted speaking period during a local council meeting when he asked the selectmen to resign.

“The arrest of (Clay) is found by the court to be a violation of (Clay’s) First Amendment right of free speech,” [the judge] Carroll wrote. The arrest amounted to “content-based censorship as the defendant was acting within the very rules promulgated by the (selectmen) as well within his constitutional rights under the U.S. and N.H. Constitutions,” Carroll wrote. Clay “complied with the board’s own protocol, established by the board for public input.”

I have embedded the video of the incident below the fold. Watch it. Essentially, the council didn’t like what Clay was saying and decided to shut him up. Granted, he was being very harsh, but tough, that is what free speech is all about. Note also that though they tell him they have ended the public input session, after he is arrested they then resume public input.

Everyone of these elected officials should be out of office. They have no understanding that their role as elected officials is to be the servant of the people, not their overlords. When a citizen is unhappy, you listen to them, and address their concerns as quickly as possible. As the least, you let the citizen air his or her complaints fully, and loudly, and then if you find they do not have merit, move on.

These thugs clearly do not understand these basic aspects of American culture.
» Read more

State Department proposes fines for writing about guns without permission

New regulations being proposed by the Obama administration would require anyone writing on the web about guns to get approval first from the State Department or face serious fines.

In their current form, the ITAR do not (as a rule) regulate technical data that are in what the regulations call the ‘public domain.’ Essentially, this means data ‘which is published and which is generally accessible or available to the public’ through a variety of specified means. These include ‘at libraries open to the public or from which the public can obtain documents.’ Many have read this provision to include material that is posted on publicly available websites, since most public libraries these days make Internet access available to their patrons.

The ITAR, however, were originally promulgated in the days before the Internet. Some State Department officials now insist that anything published online in a generally-accessible location has essentially been ‘exported,’ as it would be accessible to foreign nationals both in the U.S. and overseas.

With the new proposal published on June 3, the State Department claims to be ‘clarifying’ the rules concerning ‘technical data’ posted online or otherwise ‘released’ into the ‘public domain.’ To the contrary, however, the proposal would institute a massive new prior restraint on free speech. This is because all such releases would require the ‘authorization’ of the government before they occurred. The cumbersome and time-consuming process of obtaining such authorizations, moreover, would make online communication about certain technical aspects of firearms and ammunition essentially impossible. [emphasis mine]

In your wildest dreams did you ever think we’d come to a time in the U.S. where the federal government thought it acceptable to require citizens to get their permission before they could publish something?

A teacher’s Title IX inquisition

Link here. She was attacked and subjected to significant legal harassment, merely because she wrote an op-ed on sexual politics on campus, and some people didn’t like her opinion. They then used the badly written Title IX law, passed in 1972 by Congress to “deal with gender discrimination in public education”, to get her, and her supporters, charged and interrogated repeatedly by lawyers.

Her accusers were allowed to remain anonymous. She was denied the right to use a lawyer. The specific charges against her were never provided in writing. And they were apparently based merely on the fact that her op-ed offended her accusers.

Read it all. Since the attacks against her were instigated by the students, who represent our future, this story will give you a good sense of where our society is heading. And it ain’t paradise.

“These are the brownshirts of our time.”

Link here.

Read it. Though the author describes an event that happened in 2003, it shows us ugly circumstances that have now become quite common, because as she says, “the ‘good’ people did nothing to disperse the hostility.” And unless we do something about it now — stand up to these fascist thugs who hide behind nice-sounding ideologies — what is happening today in the worst places in the Middle East is only showing us what things will be like here in another dozen years.

Students vote to ban Chick-fil-A from Johns Hopkins campus

Fascists: In an 18-8 vote, the Student Government Association at Johns Hopkins has voted to ban Chick-fil-A from opening a franchise on campus because of the conservative opinion of its CEO towards same-sex marriage.

Most of the news reports on this story have focused on the reasons the students voted for the ban. Having such a restaurant on campus will cause students to experience “microaggressions” that will make them feel uncomfortable. We can’t have that!

I want to focus on the vote itself. That such a large majority of the student government body supports the idea that it is okay to squelch someone’s business merely because of a political disagreement speaks volumes about our future, and it is not good. These are the people that will be running society in a few years, and it is clear that they believe oppression and the use of force against their opponents is appropriate. The cultural norm for them is not to debate their opponents but to smash a boot into their face.

Based on this, if you think modern American culture is getting oppressive now, just wait. You ain’t seen nothing yet.

Another global warming advocate demands the arrest of skeptics

Fascist: Continuing in what is becoming a pattern for the left, another global warming advocate has called for the arrest of anyone who dares question the existence of human-caused global warming.

You can read his entire rant here. This quote is especially telling:

Those denialists should face jail. They should face fines. They should face lawsuits from the classes of people whose lives and livelihoods are most threatened by denialist tactics.

Let’s make a clear distinction here: I’m not talking about the man on the street who thinks Rush Limbaugh is right, and climate change is a socialist United Nations conspiracy foisted by a Muslim U.S. president on an unwitting public to erode its civil liberties.

You all know that man. That man is an idiot. He is too stupid to do anything other than choke the earth’s atmosphere a little more with his Mr. Pibb burps and his F-150’s gassy exhaust. Few of us believers in climate change can do much more—or less—than he can.

This is why, at this time especially, I refuse to cede any further power to government and its allies. A significant percentage of our population is in favor of using that power to oppress their opponents. Give them any more power and they will do it.

Americans rally to support persecuted Christians

In less than two days, an independent fund was set up and raised almost $850,000 for the owners of the Christian pizza parlor in Indiana that was forced to close because of death threats from the left wing community.

Friends of the Washington state florist whose entire life savings might be confiscated by the state for refusing to participate in a homosexual wedding have also now created another site to raise money to help her. They have already raised over $50,000.

Both funds are important for many reasons, the most important of which is each fund makes it clear that Christians of good conscience are not alone, that they can stand for their beliefs and not be abandoned and destroyed. There are thousands of people who will rally to help you.

Let me add, as a Jew, this thought on this first night of Passover. Each year on Passover, Jews gather for their Passover Seder to retell the story of their enslavement in Egypt and their escape to freedom. In doing so, you are supposed to imagine yourself as a slave who is freed. As the Haggadah, the book that outlines the Seder ceremony, states, “In every single generation, each individual is obligated to think of himself as one of those who came out of Egypt.”

The Jewish faith also emphasizes that we must thank God each time for bringing us to freedom. I say that God only helps those who help themselves. It appears that in America today, in the 21st century, we are obliged to do the same again.

Liberals are the New McCarthyites—and they’re proud of it

Link here.

Some of the hallmarks of the original McCarthyism are popping up in today’s variant. Media companies were pressured in the 1950s not to hire people suspected of Communist ties. Today, pressure is being applied to isolate or sideline scholars who disagree with climate-change policies. In the 1950s, people accused of heretical views were sometimes unfairly attacked or threatened. Today, people who oppose gay marriage sometimes see their jobs or businesses put at risk. Ask Brendan Eich, who was forced to step down last year as CEO of Mozilla for making a six-year-old donation to a measure opposing same-sex marriage. Or the owners of the Indiana pizza parlor who had to close their doors after threats mounted when they said they would serve any customers in their restaurant but wouldn’t cater a gay wedding.

Read it all. It has become increasingly obvious in recent years that the left is no longer interested in civil debate. Disagree with them, and their answer is to try to destroy you.

It’s National Hate Week!

Link here.

Today, we’re all hating on Indiana. Who will be the left’s Emmanuel Goldstein next week?

Evidently, the sole function of the media these days is to subject the public to a steady stream of manufactured events: “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot”; nuclear power kills; Lena Dunham’s rape by a college conservative at Oberlin; the “mattress girl” raped at Columbia University; Jon Stewart is funny; a fraternity gang-rape at the University of Virginia; and a law protecting religious freedom will lead to separate water fountains for gays in Indiana.

The whole country has to keep being dragged through these liberal hate campaigns, but as soon as the precipitating event turns out to be a gigantic hoax, the truth is revealed like a bedtime story being read to a child: The ending is whispered and the narrator tiptoes out of the room.

Read it all. It will help you distinguish between real news and modern leftwing propaganda, based on lies, being promoted by our modern mainstream press.

Meanwhile, that pizzeria whose owner said they wouldn’t cater a same-sex wedding, though they’d be glad to sell pizzas to homosexuals, has been forced to close because of death threats, including one threat on twitter from a high school coach who thought it a good idea to get together and burn the place down. She has since been suspended from her job.

College punishes students for sexist chanting at party, even those not there

Fascists: The University of Mary Washington has punished its entire rugby team of 46 because 8 attended a party where some had participated in “sexist chanting.”

The microaggression unfolded last November at a house party near the Fredericksburg, Virginia, campus, according to Jezebel’s Erin Gloria Ryan. Some students, likely drunk, sang a demeaning song about raping corpses and “wiggling it” inside whores—inappropriate stuff, to be sure, though not really targeted at a specific entity in a threatening way. The chant apparently has its origins in rowdy “pub” songs. It’s a curious tradition, though not one intended to inspire actual malice, it seems.

But someone at the party recorded the chant; eventually, UMW’s Feminists United on Campus found out about it and made sure university administrators were informed. This led to an investigation, and eventually, the end of the rugby team. The location of the party was said to be a “rugby house”—even though only two members of the team actually lived there—and so the entire team had to pay the price.

First of all, the chanting, as ugly as it might have been, is perfectly legal under the first amendment. Not only was it merely speech, it took place off campus in a private residence, where the college has limited jurisdiction.

Second, what kind of justice is it for the college to punish all the members of the rugby team when only a few even attended the party? Even if it had to right to do so (which I question), punishing innocent third parties is beyond Stalinistic.

Muslim university students campaign to shut down free speech

Fascists: Muslim students at the University of Missouri want to prevent the screening of the film American Sniper because they don’t agree with it.

At the heart of the controversy is a Muslim student activist who declared showing the film on campus would make her feel “unsafe” and demanded an “apology and explanation” as to how and why the movie was even selected for Mizzou audiences.

The uproar was taken quite seriously, and prompted the student government to conduct a meeting to determine whether the flick should be shown. “This film is blatant racist, colonialist propaganda that should not be shown under any circumstances and especially not endorsed by a branch of student government that purports to represent me and have my best interests in mind,” student Farah El-Jayyousi had stated. [emphasis mine]

I haven’t seen the movie, and I am sure neither has Farah El-Jayyousi above. I however wouldn’t dream of censoring it. El-Jayyousi would love to, along with any other person who dares to criticize Islam and the culture of violence and hate that now dominates it.

Family flees home due to death threats

Modern American freedom: The parents of one of the Oklahoma fraternity students caught on video making a racist chant have fled their home due to death threats.

As vile as the racist chanting was, it was not threatening anyone with death. Moreover, we have something called the first amendment, which protects all speech, even the vile kind. Threatening the parents of someone who says something you don’t like is hardly standing up for righteous principles.

In related news, Christians at George Washington University in the District of Columbia face punishment because they refuse to participate in gay sensitivity training sessions.

A conservative student group at The George Washington University faces punishment, including the loss of its funding, for refusing to engage in LGBT sensitivity training on campus. The students are now being condemned and attacked on campus by those who claim they’re committing an “act of violence” for standing up for their members’ individual rights and Judeo-Christian values. The Young America’s Foundation chapter at the Washington, D.C.-based academic institute has refused to participate in LGBT sensitivity training recently made as a requirement.

Amanda Robbins, vice president of GW YAF, told The Christian Post that their objection to the training “stems not only from many of our members’ Judeo-Christian values, but also from our organization’s commitment to defending the individual rights of every student on campus. We firmly believe that there should be no such preconditions for any student organization to be able to operate freely on campus,” said Robbins.

“Listen, you better not have a church down there.”

Another quote from the same article:

As for Pastor Olive – his church will no longer meet in its church-owned coffee house. Instead, it is taking its congregation “underground” until the issue is resolved.

Remember, this is happening in Florida, in the United States.

California bans Christian clubs at its colleges

Modern fascism: Christian clubs at California colleges have been banned because the clubs insist that their elected leaders must be Christians.

Leaders of Cru, formerly known as Campus Crusade for Christ, as well as the two other Christian clubs at San Luis Obispo that were derecognized – InterVarsity Christian Fellowship and Chinese Christian Fellowship – have insisted that they couldn’t allow any non-Christians to be leaders.

“We have no issue with anybody of any kind of race, religion coming to our weekly meetings and being a part of who we are,” San Luis Obispo Missionary Leader Jamey Pappas said. “It’s a question of who’s going to be leading our students in a Bible Study, mentoring them individually, or deciding what kind of content goes into our weekly meeting, and we want people who agree with what we’re about.”

More evidence that the concept of freedom of association is dead in America, and with it freedom itself. The result here is that it is impossible to have a religious organization on these campuses. (Note that the Islamic clubs have joined with the Christian clubs to fight the policy.)

Since I have no doubt that atheist and gay clubs accepted this policy knowing that college administrators will look the other way if they discriminate because they are considered “politically correct,” I think these religious clubs should test the policy for real. Pick an atheist club and swamp it with religious members so that a religious person gets elected as leader. We will quickly find out that the real intent of these policies has nothing to do with preventing discrimination but to squelch the freedoms of traditional American values in favor of new ideologies.

Fired for using the wrong word

Fascists: A student government representative was removed from his position at George Mason University because he used the word “illegal” in writing about his opposition to giving illegal immigrants state tuition aid.

GMU’s student body president, Philip Abbruscato, released [an] official message on Sunday boasting of the school’s “thousands of unique voices” and the student government’s “variety of backgrounds, cultures, ideologies, academic interests, and more.” Abbruscato also said that “demeaning” remarks from members of GMU’s student government would “not be tolerated at any level regardless of belief,” and removed Paglia from his position on Feb., 20. “While we all live in a society that permits us to express our opinions, we must also recognize that we live with the consequences of their impact on those we represent. [emphasis mine]

In other words, according to this fascist, you have freedom of speech as long as you don’t say anything that he disagrees with.

Christian florist tells her side of the story

Watch the video of her television interview below the fold. As she says,

It’s not about the money. It’s about freedom. It’s about my eight kids and our 23 grandchildren and the future. There’s not a price on freedom. You can’t buy my freedom. It’s me now, but tomorrow it’s going to be you. You gotta wake up. [emphasis mine]

She added,

They are talking about bullying me into doing something that is against my faith. They can’t do that.

She also makes it very clear that she and the gay couple are friends, and that she has provided flowers for them many times in the past. And when she declined to do arrangements for their marriage, she provided them alternative recommendations so they wouldn’t be deprived of service, though not from her. And it appears that this gay couple never sued her. It was the ACLU and the Washington attorney general that sued.
» Read more

Florist rejects attorney general’s deal to settle lawsuit over same-sex weddings

The Washington florist whose entire assets a judge has ruled can be confiscated because she refuses to participate in a same-sex wedding because of her Christian religion has rejected outright a settlement offered to her by the state’s attorney general.

Ms. Stutzman [the florist] rejected Friday a settlement agreement offered by Mr. Ferguson [the attorney general] that would have required her to pay $2,001 in damages and legal fees after a judge ruled last week that she violated state law by declining to provide services for a same-sex wedding. “My primary goal has always been to bring about an end to the Defendants’ unlawful conduct and to make clear that I will not tolerate discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation,” Mr. Ferguson said in a statement.

The agreement also would require Ms. Stutzman to agree “not to discriminate in the future,” which means she must provide custom floral arrangements for same-sex weddings or stop doing weddings altogether, said Peter LaVallee, a spokesman for the state attorney general’s office.

In rejecting the offer, Stutzman was very blunt about her reasons.

“Your offer reveals that you don’t really understand me or what this conflict is all about,” Ms. Stutzman said in a letter to Mr. Ferguson. “It’s about freedom, not money. I certainly don’t relish the idea of losing my business, my home, and everything else that your lawsuit threatens to take from my family, but my freedom to honor God in doing what I do best is more important.

“…I pray that you reconsider your position. … I kindly served Rob [the gay plaintiff] for nearly a decade and would gladly continue to do so. I truly want the best for my friend. I’ve also employed and served many members of the LGBT community, and I will continue to do so regardless of what happens with this case.”

She concluded, “You chose to attack my faith and pursue this not simply as a matter of law, but to threaten my very means of working, eating, and having a home. If you are serious about clarifying the law, then I urge you to drop your claims against my home, business, and other assets and pursue the legal claims through the appeal process.”

The mildness of the attorney general’s offer suggests to me that he is feeling some political heat. He looks like a tyrant and a bad guy who is trying to destroy this woman expressly because of her religious beliefs. He thus wants this case to end with a victory, but to end as quickly as possible.

A real hero of freedom

Who, when faced with numerous death threats from Islamic fundamentalists — including an actual physical attack last week that killed one and wounded three — had this to say, “I’m not going to let this attack scare me. I’m going to continue just like I always have.”

Such an individual should be heralded by all in our society and backed up with so much firepower from everyone that no terrorist would dare attack him. Sadly, this is not the case.

“It is ironic a sign warning of the liberal thought police was potentially stolen by the liberal thought police.”

Leftwing facists: A sign advertising a talk being given by Jonah Goldberg about his book Liberal Fascism at the University of Michigan was apparently stolen by liberal fascists who don’t like freedom of speech.

The sign was bright red and declared: “Warning: Liberal thought police. Jonah Goldberg on his best-selling book Liberal Fascism.” It included a picture of a smiley face with a piece of tape over its mouth and the word “censorship.” “The biggest irony is on the front of the poster it says ‘thought police,’” Audia said in an interview with The College Fix. “So a warning on thought police was censored. It’s pretty ridiculous.”

Now of course, we really don’t know exactly who stole the sign, but somehow I don’t believe it was tea party protesters offended by Goldberg’s subject matter. Moreover, such actions have become the typical behavior leftwing students and administrators on college campus.

Oxford University Press bans mention of pork in books to avoid offending Muslims or Jews

Link here.

The absurdity of this ban is so over the top that I at first was reluctant to post a link, thinking it might be a hoax. It still might be, but I have seen it sourced now in at least two publications.

Even if it is a hoax, that people believe it tells us just how subservient our intellectual elites have become when it comes to freedom of speech. Today’s modern intellectual class does not believe in free speech, it believes in not offending anyone with whom they agree or sympathize. The result is that they insist on dictating to everyone what you can or cannot say.

1 2 3 4