The Prometheus League
Breaking News and Updates
- Abolition Of Work
- Ai
- Alt-right
- Alternative Medicine
- Antifa
- Artificial General Intelligence
- Artificial Intelligence
- Artificial Super Intelligence
- Ascension
- Astronomy
- Atheism
- Atheist
- Atlas Shrugged
- Automation
- Ayn Rand
- Bahamas
- Bankruptcy
- Basic Income Guarantee
- Big Tech
- Bitcoin
- Black Lives Matter
- Blackjack
- Boca Chica Texas
- Brexit
- Caribbean
- Casino
- Casino Affiliate
- Cbd Oil
- Censorship
- Cf
- Chess Engines
- Childfree
- Cloning
- Cloud Computing
- Conscious Evolution
- Corona Virus
- Cosmic Heaven
- Covid-19
- Cryonics
- Cryptocurrency
- Cyberpunk
- Darwinism
- Democrat
- Designer Babies
- DNA
- Donald Trump
- Eczema
- Elon Musk
- Entheogens
- Ethical Egoism
- Eugenic Concepts
- Eugenics
- Euthanasia
- Evolution
- Extropian
- Extropianism
- Extropy
- Fake News
- Federalism
- Federalist
- Fifth Amendment
- Fifth Amendment
- Financial Independence
- First Amendment
- Fiscal Freedom
- Food Supplements
- Fourth Amendment
- Fourth Amendment
- Free Speech
- Freedom
- Freedom of Speech
- Futurism
- Futurist
- Gambling
- Gene Medicine
- Genetic Engineering
- Genome
- Germ Warfare
- Golden Rule
- Government Oppression
- Hedonism
- High Seas
- History
- Hubble Telescope
- Human Genetic Engineering
- Human Genetics
- Human Immortality
- Human Longevity
- Illuminati
- Immortality
- Immortality Medicine
- Intentional Communities
- Jacinda Ardern
- Jitsi
- Jordan Peterson
- Las Vegas
- Liberal
- Libertarian
- Libertarianism
- Liberty
- Life Extension
- Macau
- Marie Byrd Land
- Mars
- Mars Colonization
- Mars Colony
- Memetics
- Micronations
- Mind Uploading
- Minerva Reefs
- Modern Satanism
- Moon Colonization
- Nanotech
- National Vanguard
- NATO
- Neo-eugenics
- Neurohacking
- Neurotechnology
- New Utopia
- New Zealand
- Nihilism
- Nootropics
- NSA
- Oceania
- Offshore
- Olympics
- Online Casino
- Online Gambling
- Pantheism
- Personal Empowerment
- Poker
- Political Correctness
- Politically Incorrect
- Polygamy
- Populism
- Post Human
- Post Humanism
- Posthuman
- Posthumanism
- Private Islands
- Progress
- Proud Boys
- Psoriasis
- Psychedelics
- Putin
- Quantum Computing
- Quantum Physics
- Rationalism
- Republican
- Resource Based Economy
- Robotics
- Rockall
- Ron Paul
- Roulette
- Russia
- Sealand
- Seasteading
- Second Amendment
- Second Amendment
- Seychelles
- Singularitarianism
- Singularity
- Socio-economic Collapse
- Space Exploration
- Space Station
- Space Travel
- Spacex
- Sports Betting
- Sportsbook
- Superintelligence
- Survivalism
- Talmud
- Technology
- Teilhard De Charden
- Terraforming Mars
- The Singularity
- Tms
- Tor Browser
- Trance
- Transhuman
- Transhuman News
- Transhumanism
- Transhumanist
- Transtopian
- Transtopianism
- Ukraine
- Uncategorized
- Vaping
- Victimless Crimes
- Virtual Reality
- Wage Slavery
- War On Drugs
- Waveland
- Ww3
- Yahoo
- Zeitgeist Movement
-
Prometheism
-
Forbidden Fruit
-
The Evolutionary Perspective
Daily Archives: April 3, 2017
Who’s Violating Campus Free Speech? Follow The Money – Forbes
Posted: April 3, 2017 at 8:01 pm
Forbes | Who's Violating Campus Free Speech? Follow The Money Forbes Two alarming developments on America's campuses point to the need for and the means through which the new administration in Washington might restore the First Amendment at America's public colleges and universities. First, in November 2015, as racial ... |
Continue reading here:
Who's Violating Campus Free Speech? Follow The Money - Forbes
Posted in Free Speech
Comments Off on Who’s Violating Campus Free Speech? Follow The Money – Forbes
Do Democrats oppose Gorsuch because they hate free speech? (Yes.) – The Hill (blog)
Posted: at 8:01 pm
The Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings on Supreme Court nominee Judge Neil Gorsuch left no doubt that he is an excellent and qualified nominee and should be confirmed as the next associate justice of the United States Supreme Court.
Judge Gorsuchs answers to the committees questions demonstrated a deep understanding of the law and respect for the Constitution and the role of judges. The same cannot be said for many of the senators who questioned him.
Of course, this line of questioning was expected. Progressive activists, outside groups, and politicians have vigorously campaigned to demonize and suppress political speech in the years following Citizens United.
Whitehouse cloaked his assault on free speech under the guise of disclosure using the political bogeyman of so-called dark money.
In one particularly telling exchange, Gorsuch correctly explained that disclosure laws threaten freedom of speecha long-recognized principle in constitutional law. He cited the 1958 NAACP v. Alabama case, where the Ku Klux Klan supported attorney general of Alabama subpoenaed the NAACP for membership and supporter information. An action clearly intended to intimidate the NAACP and its supporters and stop its civil rights activity in Alabama.
The Supreme Court recognized that seeking membership and supporter information about organizations engaged in political advocacy was akin to asking members of a particular religion to wear identifying armbands and that such activity was offensive to the First Amendment.
Unwilling to accept that principle based on the Constitution and precedent, Whitehouse argued that chilling the First Amendment in favor of disclosure is a value he supports.
Clearly Whitehouse thinks his personal value of disclosure trumps the Constitution.
Judge Gorsuch did not base his answers on his personal values. Instead, he stuck to the Constitution and precedent. Exactly what a judge should do when performing his duties as a judge.
When judges do otherwise, the law means nothing.
Later in the exchange, Whitehouse asked Gorsuch why an advocacy group was now spending dark money to promote his confirmation to the court after doing the same to oppose President Obamas nominee Merrick Garland.
Whitehouse was clearly upset that he could not get at the identity of those who funded the advocacy with which he disagreed. He called on Gorsuch to demand that the group in question identify its donors, but Gorsuch did not fall for this trap.
That is because, unlike the senator and some of his colleagues, Gorsuch understands the role of judges and respects the importance of the First Amendment as a safeguard of our democracy.
The right to speak about the political issues of the day and the right to do so anonymously is a fundamental element of the freedoms of speech and association, the very core of the First Amendment.
Our founders understood this too.
The Federalist Papers were written by a group of authors only known as Publius. It wasnt until decades later that Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison were revealed as authors.
These influential papers were aimed at public persuasion in support of ratifying the Constitution, and they served their purpose. The anonymous authorship of The Federalist Papers allowed the message to stand alone on intellectual grounds and be debated on its merits, rather than devolving into a sideshow of personal character attacks.
Would Whitehouse condemn Publius as a secretive dark money front group?
Rather than confront and debate an idea, Whitehouse is focused on identifying those who support itwhy?
Given his anger over the issue, one wonders if retaliation is what the senator has in mind for those donors who fund speech he does not likeinvestigations, fines, jail, armbands?
Whitehouse wants to add to the already vast and complex regulatory regime currently restricting political speech under both federal and state law.
These regulations are burdensome to comply with at even the smallest financial levels, creating huge barriers to participation for average groups or individuals who simply want to speak on issues of public concern.
Of course, that is exactly the goal of politicians like Whitehouse and the radical progressive groups who argue for disclosure to combat the made-up threat of so-called dark money.
No one likes being criticized, and often those in power seek to quell dissent. And those who cannot compete in the arena of ideas can only win when they remove their competitors from the arena. If you can identify your enemies, you can intimidate and attack them personally rather than confront their ideas.
George III would have surely liked to know the identity of all those pesky patriots agitating for independence in 1776.
Our founders were keenly aware of the importance of the right to speak freely and enshrined it in the First Amendment. A robust and vigorous democratic republic is what they gave us. As Benjamin Franklin once observed, those who would overthrow the liberty of a nation, must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.
Our Constitution protects the liberty of our nation. If we are to retain that liberty, we must reject the values of Whitehouse and his ilk in favor of the Constitution.
It was clear from the confirmation hearings and his record, that Gorsuch will decide cases as the facts and the law dictate rather than basing decisions on his, or anyone elses, personal values.
That is precisely the role of a judge and Gorsuch understands this. Unfortunately, Whitehouse and many of his colleagues dont.
That is why the Senate should confirm Judge Gorsuch as next associate justice of the Supreme Court.
David Warrington is the chairman of Americas Foundation for Law and Liberty (@LawLiberty) and is a partner at the national law firm of LeClairRyan and leader of the firms political law practice.
The views expressed by contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill.
Here is the original post:
Do Democrats oppose Gorsuch because they hate free speech? (Yes.) - The Hill (blog)
Posted in Free Speech
Comments Off on Do Democrats oppose Gorsuch because they hate free speech? (Yes.) – The Hill (blog)
‘Free Speech Bus’ meets free speech bus in downtown Philly – PW-Philadelphia Weekly
Posted: at 8:01 pm
It only took 15 minutes for Free Speech Bus to clash with counter-demonstrations in Center City on Saturday, April 1. Before the bus could fully circled City Hall, a crowd of more than 100 protesters quickly blocked traffic in the roundabout as a form of resistance.
The message reads loud and clear on the side of the orange bus: Its Biology: Boys are boys and always will be. Girls are girls and always will be. You cant change sex. Respect all. Generic boy and girl symbols with XY and XX chromosomes accompany the message.
Protesters with transgender rights messages shut down Market Street momentarily on Saturday. Photo: Danielle Corcione/Philly Weekly
Funded by the National Organization for Marriage, the International Organization for the Family, and the conservative activist site CitizenGo, the vehicle is on a national tour to voice opposition against same-sex marriage and transgender rights, with recent stops in Boston, New Haven, Conn., and New York City.
The Advocate reports the bus was vandalizedwhile parked outside the United Nations headquarters on March 23. Just more than a month ago, a similar bus with a Spanish-language message was banned in Madrid, Spain.
Around noon on Saturday, the bus interrupted a pop-up love party centering transgender voices, particularly those of color, led by the citys Office of LGBT Affairs. The ceremony ended with a raising of the transgender flag, which consists of five horizontal stripes including two light blue, two pink and one white in the center.
The event went amazing, we had music and dancing, explains Amber Hikes, the new executive director of the Office of LGBT Affairs. We were celebrating each other and the community and having the solidarity thats provided in that space.
The lineup featured the chair of the Mayors Commission on LGBT Affairs, Sharron Cooks; poet and spoken word artist Sam Marks; Deja Lynn Alvavez of the LGBTQ Home for Hope and Mayor's Commission on LGBT Affairs; attorney running for Court of Common Pleas judge Henry Sias; and the ACLU of Pennsylvania Transgender Advocate Coordinator Naiymah Sanchez.
Police keep protesters at a distance from the Free Speech Bus as it circles City Hall. Photo: Danielle Corcione/Philly Weekly
Additionally, Cooks is the first transgender person to chair a city commission in Philadelphia. She became the first Black transgender woman to serve as a state delegate at a national convention last year, but has served the community for many years through Equality PA, the Liberty City Democratic Club, the Williams Way LGBT Center and her own consulting business.
Within the community, theres a lot conversation lately about intersectionality, so its understanding our community is incredibly diverse in terms of race, gender, orientation, age and class, Hikes adds. Bringing everyone to the table to celebrate each other, this event was a perfect reflection of that.
Another recent accomplishment is City Council recently passed a resolution to declare March 31 as a citywide Transgender Day of Visibility. The resolutions text honored the eight trans Black women who were murdered in the United States this year: Mesha Caldwell, Jaquarius Holland, Ciara McElveen, Chyna Gibson, Keke Collier, JoJo Striker, Jamie Lee Wounded Arrow and Alphonza Watson. Councilwoman Helen Gym, who co-sponsored the bill, attended the rally in solidarity.
TWITTER: @DECORCIONE
See the article here:
'Free Speech Bus' meets free speech bus in downtown Philly - PW-Philadelphia Weekly
Posted in Free Speech
Comments Off on ‘Free Speech Bus’ meets free speech bus in downtown Philly – PW-Philadelphia Weekly
Other viewpoints: Facebook should defend free speech – The Columbus Dispatch
Posted: at 8:01 pm
This month, the rulers of Pakistan stepped up a campaign against blasphemy, frightening news from an Islamic nation where insulting the official religion is a capital crime.
From an American perspective, this would merely be another, distant nations horror if it werent for one aspect of the story.
As part of the crackdown, Pakistani leaders have asked executives of Facebook and Twitter to help them help root out people who post blasphemous material on social media sites from anywhere in the world.
In response, Facebook said in mid-March that it planned to send a team to Pakistan to discuss the governments request. Really?
And this week, Pakistans interior ministry claimed Facebooks administrators have been blocking and removing blasphemous content from the site. Really?!
Its heartening to read that Facebook said in a statement that, in considering government requests, it keeps in mind the goal of protecting the privacy and rights of our users.
However, the situation calls for stronger assurance that Facebook will do its part to defend the basic human values of free thought and free expression.
Its understood that social networking companies have a complicated challenge in dealing with an array of cultures and standards of freedom in countries all over the world.
But Facebook and Twitter or any American company facing pressure such as this from Pakistani leaders must bluntly refuse to cooperate in any way with a repressive regimes efforts to forcibly squelch free expression and dissent, even if their refusal means having access to their sites blocked in those countries.
As Michael De Dora, the main representative to the United Nations from the nonprofit Center for Inquiry, said: We do not want to see the people of Pakistan cut off from such a powerful and far-reaching platform as Facebook. But we hope Facebook makes clear that it will not compromise its users safety or freedom through disclosure.
Pakistan is, sadly, far from the only country that doesnt understand the right to free speech that most Americans take for granted.
The Pew Research Center found last year that, as of 2014, 26 percent of the worlds countries and territories had laws or policies against blasphemy (that is, showing a lack of reverence for a god or sacred thing), and 13 percent had laws or policies against apostasy (the renunciation of a religion), the offenses calling for everything from fines to execution. Such laws are most common in the Middle East and North Africa.
But Pakistans policies, and its leaders rhetoric, are worse than most. According to unofficial tallies, since 1990 at least 68 people have been killed there over allegations of blasphemy, including a provincial governor shot dead six years ago by a police guard who accused him of blasphemy after he defended a Christian woman who insulted the Prophet Muhammad; and currently about 40 people are on death row or serving life sentences for blasphemy. Last week, three bloggers were arrested on blasphemy charges.
In Pakistan, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif calls blasphemy an unpardonable offense.
Here, the unpardonable offense would be failing to push back against such backward thinking. Facebook and Twitter should help to lead the push.
Orange County Register
Read the rest here:
Other viewpoints: Facebook should defend free speech - The Columbus Dispatch
Posted in Free Speech
Comments Off on Other viewpoints: Facebook should defend free speech – The Columbus Dispatch
Letter: An attack on free speech – Concord Monitor
Posted: at 8:01 pm
An attack on free speech
Susan Shamels letter requesting that the Concord Monitor limit the free speech of some of its readers was alarming (Monitor letters, March 27).
The topic of Shamels letter doesnt matter. What does matter is that some people like Shamel believe that their opinion and supporting facts matter so much that any opposing opinion does not deserve the same free speech rights.
At the same time I am sure Shamel would protest against restrictions on human rights in other countries, like Russia, she wants to restrict such human rights here in the United States and actually endorses the method of censorship used by the Los Angeles Times. The speech restriction Shamel supports has proven to be the first step in controlling and subverting human rights and is directly in line with the theories put forth by Karl Marx.
Many problems we are seeing today, including university students refusing to listen or participate in reasoned conversation, arise from this form of arrogance. I didnt serve for more than 25 years in our military so people could decide whose speech is acceptable and whose speech must be censored. Although I may adamantly oppose the viewpoints of many who speak out today, it is a basic human right to express viewpoints in a civilized manner.
I find it disgusting that people are willing to chip away at this basic human right because they believe their opinions are superior to those they wish to silence.
J. Brandon Giuda
Chichester
Posted in Free Speech
Comments Off on Letter: An attack on free speech – Concord Monitor
College Student Sues School for Hampering His Freedom of … – LifeZette
Posted: at 8:01 pm
Kevin Shaw, a student at Pierce College, has sued the school after he said he was barred from handing out copies of the United States Constitution outside of the colleges designated free speech zone.
The college actually maintains an area about the size of three parking spaces where students can exercise their constitutional rights to freedom of speech. Its a whole process for students to secure the area because they have to submit paperwork to receive passes, and there are only a few given out at one time.
Shaw says that at the time, there were no spots available for him to exercise his free speech rights.
Related: Students Demand Free College Tuition to Make Up for Slavery
He and a few other students were stopped back in November while they were handing out Spanish-language copies of the Constitution and talking with other students about their rights. Since they were outside of the free speech zone, the students were violating school policy. Shaw is suing the school for violating his civil rights by restricting his speech.
This is a pretty weird policyfor an institution of higher learning, in my opinion. While I agree that there should be a certain levelof decorum while exercising freedom of speech at a college, it shouldnt be restricted to a small space. Students who are peacefully exercising their constitutional rights shouldnt have to jump through hoops to be able to do so.
It seems like colleges across the United States have been doing more to limit what students are doing and saying, from canceling speakers they dont agree with to creating safe spaces.
College is a place where adults go to develop their knowledge and share ideas. Whether or not the ideas are popular opinion, students should still be allowed to speak freely and not check to make sure they're within thefree speech zone. Even having a designated free speech zone implies that there's something wrong with speaking opinions on campus and that students will face consequences for speaking. When did everything get so caught up in political correctness? Where was the free speech zone when rioters were tearing up Berkeley?
Related: Rioting and Violence on Parents' Dime at UC Berkeley
I would hardly call handing out copies of the United States Constitution disruptive to the learning environment.
In any case, I'm sure this has become normal for many colleges and universities across the United States. Especially with the current political climate, there seem to be quite a few headlines coming out of the woodwork where teachers are pushing their own political agendas not only in colleges, but even inelementary and middle schools. Teachers are getting caught up in pushing anti-Trump ideas.
Those areas should be given more attention and regulated.
Related: Cop's Daughter Told to Remove Her 'Blue Lives Matter' Flag
I dont think colleges need this type of policing. All of the students are adults and are perfectly capable of handling the exchange of ideas and dialogue without the establishment's telling them where to speak and where to think. Thats completely counterproductive to those who are paying large sums of money to attend these schools.
Angelina Newsom is a U.S. Army veteran and an OpsLens contributor. She served 10 years in the military, including a deployment to Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. She studies criminal justice and is still active within the military community. This OpsLens article is used by permission.
Read more at OpsLens: Respect the RankPolitical Football
View post:
College Student Sues School for Hampering His Freedom of ... - LifeZette
Posted in Freedom of Speech
Comments Off on College Student Sues School for Hampering His Freedom of … – LifeZette
WEISER: So-called ‘Dark money’ is plain free speech – Colorado Springs Gazette
Posted: at 8:01 pm
There is a new liberal pejorative for describing what is an essential aspect of our political system: anonymity in political speech. Some candidates for City Council are complaining that they don't know who are funding political campaigns so they are trying to impugn the messages by using the sinister-sounding "dark money" as a descriptor for anonymous donations that fund political speech.
"People deserve to know who's spending money to influence their vote," said Colorado Ethics Watch executive director Luis Toro inthe March 26Gazette. "It helps them understand who benefits from possible policies. And it also helps identify possible conflicts of interest with legislators and City Council members and the industries that are supporting them."
Colorado College political science professor emeritus Bob Loevy is quoted in the same article saying "The real mystery is who are the nameless, faceless persons or person who are behind the attempt to take over City Council. The voters have no way of telling what's really going on."
What's going on is anonymous political free speech, which has a long and honorable tradition extending clear back to Publius and the authors of the Federalist and anti-Federalist papers. In their day, political speech could get you hung by the British for sedition. Today it can get you attacked by masked thugs or destroy your business.
People do not deserve to know who is trying to influence their vote. The whole purpose of campaigning is to influence people's votes and it is the argument that is important, not the author. Wrote the Supreme Court, "Far from enhancing the reader's evaluation of a message, identifying the publisher can interfere with that evaluation by requiring the introduction of potentially extraneous information at the very time the reader encounters the substance of the message.The best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market."
"Don't underestimate the common man," the Court goes on to say, "People are intelligent enough to evaluate the source of an anonymous writing. They can see it is anonymous. They know it is anonymous. They can evaluate its anonymity along with its message, as long as they are permitted, as they must be, to read that message. And then, once they have done so, it is for them to decide what is 'responsible,' what is valuable, and what is truth."
Inoverturning an Ohio law that required name disclosure the Supreme Court said "Under our Constitution, anonymous pamphleteering is not a pernicious, fraudulent practice, but an honorable tradition of advocacy and of dissent. Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority." The court went on to say, "It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation - and their ideas from suppression - at the hand of an intolerant society."
And that is why people form and contribute to nonprofits to act as political speech surrogates. Such organizations provide a shield against an intolerant and increasingly violent leftist/liberal cadre of cowardly masked thugs who are willing to commit assault, arson, criminal mischief, riot and general disorder to suppress the speech of their political opponents. The gravity of the violence of these thugs was seen in Washington D.C. at President Trump's inauguration and again at a speech by Milo Yianopolous at UC Berkeley and many other places since.
The fear of persecution and violence is today, as it was in the past, a genuine physical threat that makes anonymity critical to protecting freedom of speech. That a group must by Colorado law register and be identified to band together and contribute financially to speak politically puts them at personal risk. Anonymity is all that protects those who want to engage in free speech and expression without fear of retribution and violence.
Nobody required Publius to register as a 401(c)3 nonprofit corporation and list the names of contributors before James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay were allowed to publish the Federalist Papers. We are entitled to the same protection of anonymity our forefathers enjoyed under the First Amendment.
-
Scott Weiser is an award-winning journalist
Go here to see the original:
WEISER: So-called 'Dark money' is plain free speech - Colorado Springs Gazette
Posted in Freedom of Speech
Comments Off on WEISER: So-called ‘Dark money’ is plain free speech – Colorado Springs Gazette
Former president of ACLU and co-founder of FIRE featured at RIT – Rochester Democrat and Chronicle
Posted: at 8:01 pm
Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device.
Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about
The former president of the ACLU and co-founder of FIRE are featured speakers at RIT symposium
Try Another
Audio CAPTCHA
Image CAPTCHA
Help
CancelSend
A link has been sent to your friend's email address.
A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.
Staff report 6:27 p.m. ET April 3, 2017
Nadine Strossen, Alan C. Kors(Photo: provided)
The former president of the American Civil Liberties Union and a co-founder of a group advocating free speech will be featured speakers at Rochester Institute of Technology's Center for Statesmanship, Law and Liberty's annual symposium Tuesday and Wednesday.
The symposium, "The University as a Marketplace of Ideas? The Debate over Free Speech and Fundamental Fairness on Campus," is free and open to the public.
Nadine Strossen will give a talk, "Title IX: Hostile Environment Policies that are Hostile to Free Speech and Due Process," at 7 p.m. on Tuesday in Liberal Arts Hall, Room A205, on the RIT campus.
Strossen, who is a professor of law at New York Law School, was president of the ACLU from 1991 through 2008.
Alan C. Kors will give a talk, "No Freedom of Speech, No Higher Education," onWednesday at 7 p.m., in the Ingle Auditoriumof the RIT Student Alumni Union.
Kors,a professor of history at the University of Pennsylvania, is co-founder of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE). He isthe 2005 recipient of the National Humanities Medal.
Read or Share this story: http://on.rocne.ws/2nCLZZA
0:31
0:20
1:11
0:49
0:56
0:32
0:38
1:09
0:55
1:00
0) { %>
0) { %>
See the rest here:
Former president of ACLU and co-founder of FIRE featured at RIT - Rochester Democrat and Chronicle
Posted in Freedom of Speech
Comments Off on Former president of ACLU and co-founder of FIRE featured at RIT – Rochester Democrat and Chronicle
Prominent Kiwis pen open letter saying free speech is under threat in NZ universities – Stuff.co.nz
Posted: at 8:01 pm
VERNON SMALL
Last updated11:14, April 4 2017
NZN VIDEO
It is important that strong views are expressed in NZ: Bill English
A group of 27 high-profile New Zealanders, including unlikely allies such as Don Brash and Dame Tariana Turia, have penned an open letter warning freedom of speech is under threat in the country'suniversities.
It was the brainchild of Auckland University of Technology's History Professor Paul Moon, and rejects"the forceful silencing of dissenting or unpopular views" on university campuses.
It also insists debate must not be suppressed because the ideas put forth "are thought by some or even by most people to be offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong-headed".
PHIL WALTER/GETTY IMAGES
Human Rights Commissioner Dame Susan Devoy is keen to see Police gather hate-crime statistics.
It comes after a group called theEuropean Students Associationat Auckland University was closed down after threats to its members and accusations of racism.Its leaders had denied it wasracist.
READ MORE: *Prominent Kiwis pen open letter saying free speech is under threat in NZ universities *Academic calls for better recording of hate crimes *MasseyUni chancellor steps down after sexism controversy * Editorial: There's no need for hate-crimes law in New Zealand *Susan Devoy preaches free speech not hate speech on race relations
The letter also follows Human Rights CommissionerDame Susan Devoy's February call for a review of"hate speech" law and Police Commissioner Mike Bush suggesting an examination of the pros and cons of a specific crime.
The open letterhas been signed by academics, business leaders, community representatives and controversial commentators including Sir Bob Jones, former prime minister Sir Geoffrey Palmer, Maori educationalistSir Toby Curtis, poet Albert Wendt and former MP Luamanuvao Winnie Laban.
Moon saidfreedom of speech was the foundation of a modern, diverse and democratic society and it protectedreligious freedom and individual expression.
"Kneejerk calls from Police and the Human Right Commission to introduce hate-speech laws after recent attacks on ethnic communities will have the unintended consequence of suppressing free speech. Education, open debate and understanding will change racist and intolerant views not censorship," he said.
DEAN KOZANIC/FAIRFAX NZ
Former National leader Don Brash has joined Dame Tariana Turia in opposing restrictions on freedom of speech.
Freedom ofspeech was intimatelyconnectedwith freedom of thought,he said.
"There is no inalienable right not to be offended. It is dangerous and wrong to silence someone because you takeoffenceor don't like what they say. Of course there are limits; that is why inciting hatred or violence is already a crime."
The current law was working well.
JASON OXENHAM/FAIRFAX NZ
Paul Moon, Professor of History at the Faculty of Maori Development at AUT coordinated an open letter defending free speech at universities
Police Minister Paula Bennett has poured cold water on the idea of a new crime, sayinghate speech can be an aggravating factor in sentencing but going further was not a Government priority.
But Moon said Devoy's ideaseemed tobe her legacy project. "It'snot dead in the water yet as far as we can tell."
In a speech ata Holocaust Remembrance Day event,Devoy said that free speech was one thing, hate speech another.
HAGEN HOPKINS/GETTY IMAGES
Former Maori party co-leader Dame Tariana Turia one of 27 signatories to letter defending free speech.
"I believe online hatred is something we can get better at calling out. I believe we need better restrictions when it comes to the online forums" as well as social media accounts.
It was obvious to her when freedom of speech became a cover for threatening and harmful language.
She was also keen toseePolice gather hate crime statistics.
Meanwhile Moon pointed to the forced closure of the Europeanstudent club at Auckland Universityand threats to itsmembers,describing it as a slippery slope to be wary of.
"History shows that fear and intolerance drives suppression of free speech, not that free speech causes fear and intolerance," Moon said
Universities must remain places forrobust debate and the free exchange of ideas, not a place where unpopular views were censored.
But there was a "tsunami"withuniversitiesin the UK, Australiaand the United States facinghuge restrictions on freedom of speech.
"The question is when, rather than if, that happens here. Once it happens it's very difficult to undo, so we would like to head it off," he said.
"Where it becomes dangerousterritoryis where they criminalise ideas. Where they say if you criticise someone thatpotentially constitutes hate speech and therefore you shouldn't do it.
"And that goes against two or three hundred years of European traditionand even longer in the Maori tradition where divergent views are expressed and people reach a sort of synthesis eventually... a unified or agree-to-disagree position in the end."
Being accused of hate speech would also "put a brand on your forehead - you are guiltyof hate speech... without really knowing what your motives are or looking at the arguments".
"The preparedness of the state to curtail free speech in the (name) of either good race relations or order or whatever else is a very dangerous step. Becauseit doesn't actually solve any problem it, it really just suppresses it."
He said the signatories to the letter included those diametrically opposed on some issues, such as Brash and Turia on the Treaty and Maori rights.
"But what unites them is that they areall prepared to have their say and have others have their say, even if it's a very different imposing argument. That really is the essence of how free speech works."
Moon said he planned to send a copy of the letter to all party leaders in Parliament seeking their response to it."
It was not about influencinga particularstatute, but his hope was "they will take that as guidance when they are considering any hate speech legislation".
Those who put their name to the letter were:
Assoc Professor Len Bell, Dr Don Brash, Dr David Cumin, Sir Toby Curtis,Dr Brian Edwards,Graeme Edwards, Dr Gavin Ellis, Sir Michael Friedlander,Alan Gibbs, Dame Jenny Gibbs,Bryan Gould,Wally Hirsh,Professor Manying Ip,Sir Bob Jones, Professor Pare Keiha,Assoc ProfessorLuamanuvao Winnie Laban, Dame Lesley Max,Gordon McLauchlan,Professor Paul Moon, Sir Douglas Myers,Assoc Professor Camille Nakhid, Sir Geoffrey Palmer,Professor Edwina Pio,David Rankin,Philip Temple,Dame Tariana Turia, and ProfessorAlbert Wendt.
-Stuff
Go here to read the rest:
Prominent Kiwis pen open letter saying free speech is under threat in NZ universities - Stuff.co.nz
Posted in Freedom of Speech
Comments Off on Prominent Kiwis pen open letter saying free speech is under threat in NZ universities – Stuff.co.nz
Composer Theofanidis unconvincing as theologian in Atlanta Symphony’s Creation/Creator – Washington Classical Review
Posted: at 8:01 pm
Christopher Theofanidis Creation/Creator was performed by the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra and Chorus Friday night at the Kennedy Center.
On Friday evening Washington Performing Arts and the Kennedy Center presented the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra and Chorus, under conductor Robert Spano, as part of SHIFT: A Festival of American Orchestras. The featured work was an oratorio titled Creation/Creator, by composer Christopher Theofanidis, who created the work for the Atlanta forces.
Creation/Creator is a syncretistic 15-movement work. In his program note, Theofanidis says, I sought texts thatcohered at some deeper philosophical level. Since he juxtaposes pantheism and monotheism and other completely contradictory things in what seems like a mishmash from a freshman world religions textbook, what might this deeper level be?
The eclectic selection of texts touts everything from Hinduisms extinction of the ego to its extension in various forms of artistic solipsism, ancient mythologies, bowdlerized biblical citations, and obiter dicta from various composers, scientists and other artists.
Underlying all appears to be Theofanidis desire to universalize the universal, a somewhat redundant task, which he undertakes by presupposing that various religions and mythologies are simply variants of one and the same reality. To make the point musically as well as textually, he uses an array of styles, but nothing very far out of the neo-tonal framework in which he typically writes.
The problem is Theofanidis seems not to understand any of the traditions he calls upon as they understood themselves and ends up homogenizing them in a New Age-y soup. If everything is reduced to symbols that are in the end interchangeable, the symbols themselves lose their seriousness.
That is why one finds nothing in this work of comparable power to, say, Haydns Creation which takes its sources seriously. As lovely as some of the music is, particularly in the vocal and choral writing, the work is curiously unmoving overall and seemed long at under 80 minutes.
It would be extremely difficult for anyone, even with Theofanidis evident gifts, to set his huge amount of text in melodically memorable ways. The work is stampeded by the sheer number of words.
Also, far too much of this work is at the declamatory level, whether by the speakers themselves or the chorus and orchestra together. Theofanidis uses his considerable skills as a composer effectively to illustrate words, but things go so much better when he slows things down in a section like Two Girls, based on a short poem, for soprano and mezzo, that demonstrates how gratefully he writes for voice when there is time for a melody. One wished for more such moments of repose and grace.
Nothing could be faulted on the performers parts. Whatever reservations one might have about the oratorio, it is always thrilling to hear an orchestra and chorus of this caliber perform so well, under such a capable conductor as Robert Spano, in a work they obviously know well. Soprano Jessica Rivera, mezzo-soprano Jessica Rivera, tenor Thomas Cooley, baritone Nmon Ford and bass Evan Boyer all sang solidly.
There is a 2015 CD recording of this work by these same forces, which is pleasant enough in parts, but not to the extent that it would invite frequent rehearing.
Posted in Pantheism
Comments Off on Composer Theofanidis unconvincing as theologian in Atlanta Symphony’s Creation/Creator – Washington Classical Review