IvanKaramazov

Members
  • Content count

    38,854
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

IvanKaramazov last won the day on October 31 2016

IvanKaramazov had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

5,953 Excellent

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Buffalo Bills

Recent Profile Visitors

16,252 profile views
  1. And we're not even two months into his administration yet.
  2. Maybe the guy was thinking you were going to whack somebody from another family with a car bomb or something. No reason to assume the guy was trafficking in anti-Muslim stereotypes.
  3. Of course he did. But support of gay marriage was such a political liability in 2008 that he had to publicly oppose it. By the time Obama left office, opposition to gay marriage had become a political liability, to the point that the guy who felt free insulting Mexicans, Muslims, and women went out of his way to signal approval for LGBT issues. (Not that he's governing that way, but you get the idea). I can't think of any other social issue that swung so wildly from one side to the other over the course of one administration. Edit: FGILC said this already while I was typing my post.
  4. The statement was that gay rights moved along quickly. Not that they were ever lacking.
  5. They would be wrong. We went from electing a candidate who openly opposed gay marriage (Obama) to gay marriage being the law of the land in a single presidential administration.
  6. That's not how I read it, but I'll leave it to him to clarify if he wants.
  7. Whether you have the right to do something is the same thing as whether it is right to do something. It's perfectly reasonable and consistent to say that Google has a right to censor particular sites by removing them from its search engine, and also to criticize them for having done so. That seemed to me to be what Rove! was doing, but maybe I misread him and he's more than capable of speaking for himself anyway. Edit: To be clear, I don't have enough information to have an opinion about Google's de-listing of this one particular site. I'm just saying that there's nothing particularly odd about Rove!'s argument.
  8. How odd that a government would take existing laws and exploit them to infringe on civil liberties. It's almost like handing states a really a really broad set of criminal statutes is a bad idea somehow.
  9. Taking these in order: 1) Yes, of course it does. I don't think anybody is disputing that. 2) It's censorship because it's depriving people of access to information. That's what censorship is, by definition. You don't have to be a government to engage in censorship. Although I would definitely agree that censorship carried out by a government is more problematic that censorship that takes place in the private sector. 3) Yes, it is. Churches have every right to insist that people not distribute pornography in their facilities, and that's a perfectly fine, reasonable choice. Not all forms of censorship are automatically bad.
  10. Of course all the habitable planets congregate around an ultra-cool dwarf star. The shy, nerdy dwarf star just gets asteroids.
  11. I can't recall having been in a single-gender gym class when I was in school. Has it always been that way, or am I mis-remembering?
  12. My understanding is that in most cases, the inviting was done by Young Americans for Freedom (YAF) or some flavor of Campus Republicans. Again, this varies from campus to campus, but usually there isn't any permitting. If the student group can pony up the speaking fee, that's all that's needed. There need not be any particular academic value, other than the fact that the club wants this speaker in front of their group. All of that is as it should be. We should not have deans, vice presidents, provosts, etc. picking and choosing who student groups get to invite to campus with their own money. That said, it would be nice if they would refrain from picking people like Milo.
  13. The guy shouldn't have been getting any to start with. The misogyny, racism, and homophobia should have been enough to destroy his business on the speaker circuit. Instead, it took a bizarre pedophilia eruption to kill him off. It says a lot about the campus right that all that other stuff was a-okay, and it required an endorsement of pedophilia for people to come to their senses.
  14. I don't take him seriously either, but the sad truth is that he's incredibly popular on the "campus Republicans" circuit, which reflects very negatively on the current state of conservatism. William F. Buckley would have run this guy out of town.