I’m not saying they don’t have the right to protest… they do.
And I have the right to judge them for their protest.
When they say “Dr. Stock should be stripped of her right to free speech” then I am going to judge them as people who hate free speech.
In all honesty, I would love to see that actually happen. I don’t believe it ever would, speaking from experience.
Um, yeah, that’s why I said:
The 1st Amendment is a U.S. thing. Freedom of speech is (no longer) uniquely an American right.
I thought she joined the University of Austin Faculty.
Perhaps, I don’t see mention of it on her Wikipedia page.
Was her employer the government? I honestly don’t know how it works in the UK. I don’t think it’s illegal to fire someone for their views if they are public about them and are not employed by the government. Free speech doesn’t apply to private employers. Tenure would add some complications, I’m sure. But not because of free speech.
Anyway, this is assuming the US, where this didn’t happen anyway.
Yes
Sure but in the specific article the focus is on academic freedom, which is basically the practice of universities to take on similar protections for professors (within an academic setting, I believe), beyond the right enshrined in the US Constitution.
“Free speech” is a common civil liberty outside of merely the US Constitution.
She did, but she didn’t move to Austin and it’s a part-time position.
ETA: Ninja’d again!
Then sure, the university did the right thing by not firing her.
I still don’t think requesting something that is illegal for the purpose of expressing your disagreement is a desire to overthrow a constitution or government. If you had a department head and professor teaching philosophy who insisted women were inferior to men, even writing a book on the subject, and they had tenure and no legal options to be removed, should students sit idly by if they find their views abhorrent? Or should they make some kind of statement that they vehemently disagree with what they’re being taught, knowing that it could only legally ever be an empty statement? And why is that wrong?
Note I’m not referring to those who threatened any violence or harassed her. That’s outright wrong and illegal.
Not what I (or AFAICT, anyone else) is saying.
Demanding that others be stripped of their right to free speech is hatred of free speech.
You keep saying demanding, but what were their demands?
And I don’t see how what I claimed you were saying is anything different from how you rephrased it They were asking (demanding?) the university to violate her free speech rights (something that is illegal and in this country, unconstitutional) to make a statement of their disapproval of her. You’re saying they must hate free speech. But perhaps they were only trying to make a statement that was heard, not expecting (or demanding?) the university to go through with it?
What would a better way to approach it have been in your opinion?
Wait, you keep telling me that I’m wrong but you aren’t even familiar with what happened?
From NormalDan’s article (emphasis mine):
So yes, to be clear… those are the people who I’m saying hate free speech.
I’m saying that I define “demand” differently from “want” and what were they threatening to do if their “demands” weren’t met? Continue to have loud opinions on the subject? I don’t consider that a “demand.” They might have, you might have, but I think it’s a bit melodramatic.
Demanding that others be stripped of their right to free speech
is not the same as
Our demand is simple: fire Kathleen Stock. Until then, you’ll see us around.
And I think that’s an absurd take on the topic. I think they wanted a platform, they made a request that couldn’t be met for publicity on their platform, and the publicity resulted in a legal end that they were happy with. Maybe not pleasant or morally right, but it worked and free speech was never violated. Seems pretty effective (from their POV) to me.
Obviously you disagree, so, that’s that.
I think it’s a little weird to say that “our demand” is not a demand.
Or are you saying that “fire Kathleen Stock [from her post at a public university]” is not stripping her of her right to free speech?
I disagree on both counts, but I’m not sure which point you’re trying to make.
