NAMBLA could only hold such an event if the school allowed it. Comparing a pedophile support group that advocates illegal activities with the Federalist Society is rather specious
So...a scheduled event hosted by a private organization involving guest speakers and a specific format is different...how exactly?
He's been dead for years. His position at the event in question was to eliminate racial discrimination in elite universities' admissions process. Period.
Ernest van den Haag, "Intelligence or Prejudice?," in National Review XVI, No. 48 (December 1, 1964) pp. 1059–63.
If management wanted to remove them, I would support management on that case. It seems management did not want to, they wanted a free speech space and allowed the protesters to exercise their free speech
they don't support the far left collectivist nonsense he pines for ?
No...they had them removed, and then removed from the grounds when they continued. Which you considered a curtailment (more accurately...how did you put it..."why do you hate free speech?")
But Professor Ernest had no interest in eliminating racial discrimination. In fact he openly advocated racial discrimination against black people, due to their "intellectual inferiority."
Do you get what was being discussed at the Federalist Society meeting at Yale? that there were representatives from two groups-two groups that often clash over many issues?
NOt relevant here. not an issue at the meeting I was discussing. The issue may have been "resolved: affirmative action should be eliminated" or something like that-it may well have been "resolved: affirmative action benefits society" I don't recall exactly
do you understand the difference between a scheduled discussion versus those trying to prevent others from discussing it?
Do you ever wonder then after this has come full circle...why you bothered to make your initial comment, since your position is, apparently, identical to mine?
You don't think it's relevant when one of the people debating affirmative action believes that Black people are racially inferior, and openly advocates racial discrimination?
I find it interesting that everyone thinks their right to free speech overrides everyone else right to free speech. IN the end they physically blocked and manhandled people exiting the room and there free speech ended and assault began and the law students must have known that. I would have arrested those who touched the people exiting the room and charged them and that would have been the end of their law careers.
'Grow Up': Yale Law School Students Interrupt Event, Demand Right To Talk Over Speakers
Yale Law School's chapter of the Federalist Society invited two speakers to campus to discuss a recent Supreme Court case,…reason.com
We should probably just have a cancel culture section, because heres another example.
TLDR
Student group invites speakers to discuss a legal case
Other students disrupt it, claiming they have more freedom of speech than the speakers
After theyre ejected, they claim the speakers are intolerant and shouldnt be tolerated
After the police show up to stop their peaceful banging on the walls, harrasment, and blocking exits, they claim the police are harmful and should be ejected (by who?)
Which makes me wonder if they teach irony at Yale.
there should be no ability to disrupt the scheduled meetings of other students. and it is almost always leftwing activists who want to disrupt things
were you there? of course not-was there any mention of what Van Den Haag may have stated long after the debate? NO. I doubt any of the 15-20 picketers had any idea about the views you are discussing.
In fact his belief in the inherent inferiority of black people was already a matter of public record by that time, published in "Intelligence or Prejudice?," in National Review XVI, No. 48 (December 1, 1964) pp. 1059–63.