Daily Archives: May 2, 2017

Shanta Driver 7:04 p.m. ET May 1, 2017

A protest on May 1, 2017, in San Francisco.(Photo: Justin Sullivan, Getty Images)

America today is engaged in a historic struggle, testing whether the nations principles of freedom and unalienable rights can exist for millions of immigrants. Their freedom, their rights, are under attack.

The Trump administration is conducting a racial purge, a campaign of mass deportations against Americas Latino and Muslim immigrant communities. Immigrants who have lived peacefully in America for many years are being driven from their homes and families. This unfolding human catastrophe is the single greatest threat to all freedom and all rights in our nation.

But some of Trumps supporters anti-immigrant demagogues and even fringe fascist elements are seeking to change the subject of discourse to a different sort of freedom, one that shows no signs of being in peril: the free speech of the anti-immigrant demagogues. It is a dishonest, hypocritical diversion.

The anti-immigrant demagogues organize followers all over the country, and speak incessantly. Their right to speak is effusively defended by every branch of government, by the politicians of both political parties, by every police department and by every major news outlet, including USA TODAY. The entire issue is a straw man.

There is no government plot to abridge or abolish the free speech rights of the anti-immigrant bigots; the real question is whether there will be anyone left to speak against them.

Campus mobs muzzle free speech: Our view

The objective of these anti-immigrant demagogues is to repress and ultimately silence the free speech of the growing Resistance: the mass movement for immigrant rights.

Today, the only true defense of freedom and equality rests on the shoulders of Americas huddled masses yearning to breathe free. To the growing movement for immigrant rights that has mobilized in the streets and is braving the storms of persecution, and to the millions of immigrants who are fighting for their rights against a vicious campaign of scapegoating, the following declaration must be made: Your very presence makes America the home of the brave fighting together, we will make it the land of the free.

Shanta Driver is national chair of BAMN (By Any Means Necessary).

Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/2qrx8Di

More:
Free speech issue is a diversion: Opposing view - USA TODAY

If you dont know about the current and impending removal of Confederate-related monuments in New Orleans, including Robert E. Lee, P.G.T. Beauregard, Jefferson Davis and the Liberty monument (already removed under cover of darkness last week), you must be under a rock, because it has made the national news.

This weekend, The Holy Ground bar on the corner of South Jeff Davis Parkway and Canal Street had a run-in with some pro-monument protestors, who, according to the Mid-CityMessenger, say that the bar refused them service and trash talked them while liquoring up the enemy. The owners deny the charges; but Facebook came to the pro-monument protestors rescue.

The protestors apparently barraged the bars Facebook page with negative reviews and the bar owner shut down the bars Facebook page on Sunday due to the negativity.

I agree that both sides should have the ability to express themselves vis a vis the removal of the monuments. However, no protestor should not have the right to damage abusinesss reputation by creating negative posts. Its nasty and its dirty pool. Heres the problem with Facebook and social media: they areliterally being used to intimidate people, patrons and viewers of the media. Its impact is incredible, be it for good or evildepending on your POV. Social media is being used as a weapon of mass destruction.

Let me draw an analogy here: social media is being abused. Its become a cannonthat shoots or threatens to destroyothers anonymously. And damage occurs on both sides, becausetrust methe real story can never be determined by reading Facebook or Twitter posts. Its so sad that people buy whatever is shoved in their face by internet users, with no credibility, no research,limited perspective, and out of pure emotion.

This is why its important to have objectivity in reportage. This is why credible media journalistic reporting is so crucial to a viable democracy. As far as Im concerned, everything on Facebook and Twitter is twisted and spun by their posters, who, as you should be aware, are only trying to influence the mob and have no credibility. Stop paying attention to this baloney!

Is social media actually killing free speech? When is the backlash going to come?

Read more from the original source:
Free Speech Run Amok - OffBeat Magazine

Liberal censorship is technically an oxymoron but today, liberal censorship is a common reality.

Where once free speech reigned on college campuses and in other secular institutions (or at least it was so thought), today you have the totalitarianism of political correctness. Say the wrong thing, and you may be fired.

Dissenting Justice Samuel Alito said after the Supreme Court same-sex marriage decision in June 2015: I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes, but if they repeat those views in public, they will risk being labeled as bigots and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools.

Ann Coulter, conservative firebrand, has proven recently that free speech is all but dead in America. Her aborted attempt last week to speak at Berkeley the supposed birthplace of free speech in America went up in flames. Almost literally.

Young Americas Foundation and the Berkeley College Republicans had invited Coulter to speak, but the school would not insure her safety, while the protesters vowed to violently shut her down. Coulter said to the New York Times: Its a sad day for free speech.

As we see repeatedly, the tolerant folk are the most intolerant amongst us. Their attitude is simple: Free speech for me, but not for thee.

Historically, Christianity played a seminal role in the struggle for free speech not that Christians have always gotten it right by any means.

The 17th century British Puritan writer John Milton, author of Paradise Lost, wrote a plea for a free press, Areopagitica. He stated, Truth indeed came once into the world with her divine Master, and was a perfect shape most glorious to look on. For who knows not that Truth is strong, next to the Almighty? She needs no policies, nor stratagems, nor licensings to make her victorious. Gods truth stands on its own, needing no artificial man-made props.

This reminds me of the quote from church father Tertullian, writing about A.D. 200: Truth asks no favours in her cause. She doesnt need any. Truth wins out in the marketplace of ideas.

In 1777, Thomas Jefferson noted that Jesus (the Holy author of our religion) is the reason we should allow civil freedom. This was in his Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, passed in 1786.

Jefferson wrote: Almighty God hath created the mind free all attempts to influence it by temporal punishment or burdens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy author of our religion, who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was his Almighty power to do. Jesus gives us freedom who are we to deny it from others?

The alternative media continue to be a major lifeline for those in America who have dissenting views from the politically correct orthodoxy. We see a powerful example of this in WND, founded by journalist Joseph Farah. The pioneering independent online news source celebrates its 20th anniversary this week. For his efforts, Southern Poverty Law Center profiles Farah as a supposed extremist of hate. I emailed him their outrageous, derogatory profile of him. He emailed me back, Same old. Same old.

One of the saddest aspects of the Coulter-Berkeley story was the statement from former DNC Chairman Howard Dean, who said, Hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment.

Tragically, many in our society today including liberal protesters preventing conservatives and Christians from being able to speak do so supposedly in opposition to hate speech. First of all, where does the First Amendment make a provision for silencing hate speech? And secondly, who defines what is real hate and what is not? It seems that hate now is often speech I disagree with.

I know a brother in Christ, David Kyle Foster, who used to be a male prostitute in Hollywood. He once told me that he probably had slept with more than a thousand different men before the Lord saved him.

Foster has interviewed hundreds of former homosexuals and lesbians and people struggling with all sorts of sexual issues, who found healing through the gospel of Jesus. Up until recently, these powerful, sensitive videos were available on Vimeo, which fashions itself as a high quality version of YouTube.

But Vimeo told Foster recently that all his videos had to be deleted because of their hate messages. Testimonials of lives set free through Christ are hate speech? That is another example of free speech for me, but for not for thee.

Now, if only our universities and media companies could come to grips with the First Amendment as designed by our founders, how better off things would be.

Media wishing to interview Jerry Newcombe, please contact media@wnd.com.

Read the original post:
FOR GOD AND COUNTRY - WND.com

A new survey has been releasedshowing that a vast majority of millennials do not agree with the anti-free speech groups that have been popping up on university campuses.

The survey released byThe Fund for American Studies (TFAS) shows that 92 percent of millennials across the nation support free speech. Additionally, 93 percent of millennials supportreligious freedom.

The media keeps showing us images of violent protests on college campuses, young Americans being angry and disruptive, but the truth is that millennials support religious and social freedoms more than non-millennials, said Roger Ream, ofTFAS. Theres a vast, silent majority of millennials who embrace these freedoms and those are the young men and women we are seeing in our programs.

TFAS utilizes a Support for Freedom Index, measures how Americans define freedom, and whether or not they support more government intervention in their daily lives. Interestingly, millennials (ages 18-34) believe that more government is necessary to protect freedoms at 54 percent. However, the majoritybelieve that government is necessary to safeguardfreedoms (60 percent), not safety (40 percent).

A surprising finding by the study, however, shows that when it comes to who prefers freedoms over safety, its Republicans who tend to lean toward safety, diverging from their ideological cousins, the conservatives.

From TFAS:

Additionally, further distinctions at the ideological level within the Republican party were found. When asked to choose between individual liberty and concerns about security, conservatives split evenly between their support for liberty (51%) and security (49%). Republicans fall more in the camp of more government that ensures national security. Conservatives fall primarily in the camp of less government that promotes liberty.

When you take a comparative look at conservative and Republican ideologies toward freedom, you would expect a lot of overlap. One of the surprising findings of this survey is that Republicans favor an active government approach which prioritizes security over individual liberties, said Roger Ream. This may explain some of the resonance for President Trumps message in the GOP primaries, resonance that many, at the time, didnt fully grasp.Conservatives were more supportive of a passive government which prioritizes liberty over security concerns, Ream concludes.

This support for government intervention from the millennial right continues when it comes to certain economic issues. For instance, both Republicans and conservatives support tariffs on goods that Americans buy from overseas by 71 percent, and 70 percent respectively. Furthermore, 61 percent of Republicans, and 57 percent of conservatives believe that government should regulate oil companies to forcefully keep gas prices low.

This is due in part to a failure on the part of traditional education to teach economics and the media to explain economics to the average American, Ream said.

See more here:
New national survey shows that millennials overwhelmingly support free speech - TheBlaze.com