4 ms·

At a time when many prestigious private schools had Jewish quotas for students and faculty, the U of C did not. There should never be bans of free speech consi

At a time when many prestigious private schools had Jewish quotas for students and faculty, the U of C did not. There should never be bans of free speech consistent with that of the First Amendment (i.e, you can't shout "Fire" in a movie theater). I hope that there is a law passed that universities that block free speech as many have, are not allowed to receive federal funds in the form government grants for faculty, and financial aid for students.

x1798DE 10y ago
> There should never be bans of free speech consistent with that of the First Amendment (i.e, you can't shout "Fire" in a movie theater). Freedom of speech and the First Amendment are two different things (and I'll note that there is no limiting clause in the first amendment), and I think it would be helpful if people realized this. Freedom of speech is a broader principle that is (IMO) a good idea independent of any legal enshrinement of the law.
- davidf18 10y ago
  I'm not certain, but I think there was a Supreme Court ruling that said you can't shout, "Fire" in a movie theater as an action of free speech or the First Amendment. At any rate, people pay good tuition money to get an education and part of an education is the free exchange of ideas.
  - x1798DE 10y ago
    Yes, the Supreme court has given many "passes" to the government to regulate your free speech, but what I was saying is that it's important to separate the concept of "free speech" from the legal institutions that attempt to prevent their restriction (by the government). There are many situations where it is legally allowed for someone to curtail your freedom of speech, and that is independent of whether or not it is a good idea for that person to exercise their right to do so.
r_smart 10y ago
Shouting Fire in a theater is a nonsense example used in a horrible ruling on the first amendment. [0] [0]: https://popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackneyed-apologia-for-censorship-are-enough/ https://popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackne...

x1798DE 10y ago

> There should never be bans of free speech consistent with that of the First Amendment (i.e, you can't shout "Fire" in a movie theater). Freedom of speech and the First Amendment are two different things (and I'll note that there is no limiting clause in the first amendment), and I think it would be helpful if people realized this. Freedom of speech is a broader principle that is (IMO) a good idea independent of any legal enshrinement of the law.

davidf18 10y ago
I'm not certain, but I think there was a Supreme Court ruling that said you can't shout, "Fire" in a movie theater as an action of free speech or the First Amendment. At any rate, people pay good tuition money to get an education and part of an education is the free exchange of ideas.
- x1798DE 10y ago
  Yes, the Supreme court has given many "passes" to the government to regulate your free speech, but what I was saying is that it's important to separate the concept of "free speech" from the legal institutions that attempt to prevent their restriction (by the government). There are many situations where it is legally allowed for someone to curtail your freedom of speech, and that is independent of whether or not it is a good idea for that person to exercise their right to do so.

r_smart 10y ago

Shouting Fire in a theater is a nonsense example used in a horrible ruling on the first amendment. [0] [0]: https://popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackneyed-apologia-for-censorship-are-enough/ https://popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackne...