ACLU: Defense of free speech may harm our equality and justice work.
| Indecent yapping people who are hurt | 06/22/18 | | floppy impressive pistol resort | 06/22/18 | | Multi-colored rebellious plaza | 06/22/18 | | histrionic shimmering corn cake | 06/22/18 | | Comical Area Hunting Ground | 06/22/18 | | Light shrine cumskin | 06/22/18 | | massive galvanic mad-dog skullcap | 06/22/18 | | hateful nursing home | 06/22/18 | | Twisted Bistre Hairy Legs | 06/24/18 | | odious church psychic | 06/22/18 | | Indecent yapping people who are hurt | 06/22/18 | | pearly brunch | 06/24/18 | | Grizzly Vigorous Wrinkle House | 06/22/18 | | marvelous idiotic corner filthpig | 06/22/18 | | Grizzly Vigorous Wrinkle House | 06/22/18 | | Turquoise business firm | 06/24/18 | | Razzmatazz masturbator telephone | 06/22/18 | | hateful nursing home | 06/22/18 | | Light shrine cumskin | 06/22/18 | | hateful nursing home | 06/22/18 | | Mentally Impaired Rigor | 06/22/18 | | Maroon mother | 06/22/18 | | Maroon mother | 06/22/18 | | floppy impressive pistol resort | 06/22/18 | | hateful nursing home | 06/22/18 | | cyan quadroon | 06/22/18 | | Gaped glassy whorehouse | 06/22/18 | | Twisted Bistre Hairy Legs | 06/24/18 | | Turquoise business firm | 06/24/18 | | Gaped glassy whorehouse | 06/22/18 | | cyan quadroon | 06/22/18 | | Indecent yapping people who are hurt | 06/22/18 | | mint flatulent station | 06/22/18 | | pearly brunch | 06/24/18 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: June 22nd, 2018 4:30 PM Author: Indecent yapping people who are hurt
In carrying out the ACLU’s commitment to defend freedom of speech, a number of specific considerations may arise. We emphasize that in keeping with our commitment to advancing free speech for all, these are neutral principles that apply to all speakers, irrespective of the speaker’s particular political views:
. . . .
The impact of the proposed speech and the impact of its suppression: Our defense of speech may have a greater or lesser harmful impact on the equality and justice work to which we are also committed, depending on factors such as the (present and historical) context of the proposed speech; the potential effect on marginalized communities; the extent to which the speech may assist in advancing the goals of white supremacists or others whose views are contrary to our values; and the structural and power inequalities in the community in which the speech will occur.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/20180621ACLU.pdf
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4008245&forum_id=2#36292503) |
Date: June 22nd, 2018 5:05 PM Author: Maroon mother
Three potential reads on this:
(1) Naive view: True as stated. The ACLU is balancing its interests in promoting free speech on the one hand and helping blacks and queers make America worse on the other, and finds that the former has a deleterious effect on the latter. For that reason it will limit its still-cherished mission of free speech (presumably because free speech still has weakly positive instrumental value, as a rule, in ruining society).
(2) Hopeful view: The ACLU had a genuine commitment to the principle of free speech, viewing the principle itself as either sacrosanct in its own right or as the guarantor of freedom. But the ACLU has finally succumbed to moral pressure to renege on that commitment, since free speech can be and is being used against the agenda of the socially vulnerable (or whatever the ACLU calls blacks and queers). This was the inevitable consequence of a shift in liberal values away from a politics of freedom and toward a harm-based morality. It is not formally dropping free speech as a principle to which it is dedicated for reasons of optics.
(3) Other view: Free speech was useful in corroding American society in previous decades. Since it is now being used to defend whatever vestiges remain of culture and tradition, it's time to drop it as a principle worth defending.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4008245&forum_id=2#36292749) |
Date: June 22nd, 2018 11:10 PM Author: Indecent yapping people who are hurt
ACLU responds, making reference to "lived experience."
"Kaminer objects to any acknowledgement that speech can cause harm. But that is simply a recognition of fact, and denying it flies in the face of LIVED EXPERIENCE and ignores the costs of free speech."
https://reason.com/volokh/2018/06/22/aclus-david-cole-responds-about-aclu-and
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4008245&forum_id=2#36294510)
|
|
|