4 ms·
The anti-gay rant quoted in this article did not come from Thiel, and I can't see anything in the linked articles to show he backed it. Not that I'm claiming Th
by sevenless 10y ago
The anti-gay rant quoted in this article did not come from Thiel, and I can't see anything in the linked articles to show he backed it. Not that I'm claiming Thiel is a lifelong supporter of gay rights or has never said anything terrible, simply that this article doesn't seem to support what you're claiming.
Anyway, Thiel isn't a Republican himself. As per Wiki, he's a Libertarian, from an Evangelical background.
I liked this link though, from 1995:
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Stanford-President-Condemns-Opinion-Piece-3022703.php http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Stanford-President-Condem...
> Calling the multiculturalism movement "mindless," the piece argues that as "recycled anti-Western banalities substitute for a genuine study of Western and non- Western cultures, multiculturalism is effectively wasting some of the best years of America's brightest students." In some feminist studies courses, students were asked to write, but not necessarily send, letters to their parents about "coming out as a lesbian," said Sacks and Thiel.
> The two also criticized a class on the history of rights in the United States, saying it "was so busy extolling 1960s protests movements that the class never got around to studying the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution."
Have campus conservatives ever found anything new to complain about?
- CPLX 10y agoYou're trying to claim that a person who is an actual delegate for the Republican nominee for president and a main stage speaker at the RNC isn't a Republican. Clearly our views of what that word means diverge. Regarding the Stanford incident, Gawker has the most fleshed out backstory: http://gawker.com/the-free-speech-peter-thiel-will-defend-faggot-faggo-1779486823 http://gawker.com/the-free-speech-peter-thiel-will-defend-fa...
- stcredzero 10y agoHave campus conservatives ever found anything new to complain about? Why do they need to find something new? If it's a stand on principles, then all they need is to point out disregard of principles. "Newness" misses the point and would appear to be a form of shallowness that feels entitled to novelty.