6th Circuit Reaches Conclusion on ‘Preferred Pronouns'

Stupid? No court should have ruled any other way. The fact that it had to reach as high as it did is a testament to activist judges. Compelled speech is the very antithesis of Free Speech. If you don't want Free Speech, then do not live in America.

 

Okay so there are lots of things to break down with the idea of compelled speech because we are compelled to speak a certain way.

Let’s ask another question then. Why do we bother having this kind of freedom of speech? If the speech we have is venemous and hurts people, what’s the point in having it? Preferred pronouns actually have a health role. They can reduce the risk of suicide and improve ones mental state. So why bother using with saying the professor won’t recogonize their pronouns?

 

I quotes the DSM. It’s a mental illness.

And there are male and female birds.

There is no until you’re not. If you are born a male, you remain a male. No matter how many hormones you take or body parts you cut off.

What color is the sky on Mars in June?

 

And then I said you didn’t scroll all the way to the section where it says they changed it so it wasn’t a disorder anymore. In fact one of the reasons they were worried about it being classified as a disorder was because bigots were going to use it to attack trans people, same as when being gay was a disorder.

Restating your position is not a response to my question.

Yawn. I’m just bored of you saying the same thing over and over again and not improving upon it. Ugh this is like the guy in Chess who doesn’t know how to develop their side.

The loveliest sensory experience on mars I imagine.

 

Because when speech is hindered ideas are hindered. When ideas are hindered progress is hindered. When progress is hindered stagnation occurs.

Lets put it another way.

I'm sure you've heard how the Church suppressed speech that didn't agree with their doctrine? How Galileo was imprisoned because he said the Earth was round? And many others like him? If it wasn't for such people we would still be stuck in the dark ages. Suppression of speech leads to inequality.

 

What scary is that a federal judge basically said professors have zero freedom of speech to begin with, let alone one who has been on the bench since 1995.

 

they renamed it. It remains a mental illness. It says so right in the DSM.

It’s not a response you like. I don’t care if you like it or not. It remains fact regardless.

What I’m saying is objective reality. Not sure why you’d expect me to say something different.

Lol I checkmated you in my first post.

 

And what if you are compelled to have those ideas? That the 'church suppresses speech' despite the fact it was a bastion of learning and the ancients, or that Gailleo was suppressed by the Church despite the fact he had no reason to be right when everyone around him was wrong. And what if you have the idea of freedom of speech not because it's a good idea but because you are compelled to believe it?

 

If you say your original position again do you think you will actually be able to convince yourself you read all the way to the bottom, or will stating it give you that satisfaction? Dysphoria is not a mental disorder, much in the same way as a person wanting to lose weight does not have an eating disorder.

It remains a fact you moved your bishop back to C1 again. Keep saying the same things over and over again, maybe you won't notice when your king is in check.

Because the "It's my reality so I can say whatever I want' arguments are stupid. Like really not everyone has the same experiences and to say yours is better is egotistical. Look at what I did. I asked you about birds, and your response is to restate your starting position over and over again. It's just predictable.

No sweetie, you got confused which color you were playing again. You spent your last 10 moves saying the same things over and over again.

 

Ah, yes. When you disagree with a judges or a courts ruling they are not following the law, and you, with all of your learning and wide ranging legal expertise are setting the rest of us straight.

 

I bet You were not set straight. Actually forget me, it was the US Supreme court that ripped so many of the 6th court decisions to shreds. At last some Judges on the 6th circuit caught on.

 

People always invest new words to describe themself. Christian, conservative, patriot....all invented to describe someone

 

So was the word abnormal and freak.

 

And you don’t mind calling them that

 

Irrelevant. Compelled speech is an abomination. We live in democracies, not North Korea.

 

Hey, you’re the guy who has names and labels for folks who hate names and labels.

 

No, they are not. No more than Who's A Good Boy is a dog because he says he is.

Meantime, the DSM was compromised years ago. The 'flat earthers' got to it.

 

Quite apart from the totalitarianism of compelled speech, there's the issue of the flaming narcissism implicit in demanding others see you as you desire, rather than as they will. That alone is well beyond social normalcy, and borders on sociopathy.

 

Actually they are simple and clear-cut. They aren't going to appeal this to SCOTUS because if they did they would get their clock cleaned:

• The government may not compel a speaker to affirm a belief with which the speaker disagrees.

What's "thorny and complicated" about that?

• The free speech clause of the Constitution applies at public universities

What's "thorny and complicated" about that?

• Professors do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the university gate.

What's "thorny and complicated" about that?

Some on the left have increasingly legitimized bullying and on the street, even violence toward those who dare to disagree. Do you have any sense of how fed up folks are with that? I love to see them appeal this to the high court.

Progressives (and thankfully there are some exceptions) will not admit that they have a unique problem with favoring threats and demands to cancel opponents instead of conversation.

The Left’s tendency to dismiss the value of viewpoint diversity is just an extension of their love of cancel culture. They don't want folks with a different outlook to have a seat at the table.

 

With respect, this is just terrible. If you are so exceptionally fragile and vulnerable to personal slights that you're a suicide risk, you have no business being out in the community and exposed to the general public (who will always find ways to annoy or upset us, such is the nature of the beast).

At the end of the day, it's on us of us to adapt to the world as it is, not as our narcissistic solipsism demands of it. If you can't handle the brutal nature of public perception, then don't make yourself a cause for so much confusion.

 

Everyone uses names and labels lol
I prefer no pronouns. Say my name every time instead lol

 

Expecting others to be courteous really offends you? Just like calling a priest father, or calling the president Mr president. If calling some fella she will make his happy, Wtf do I care?

 

Read what I wrote. This is about the DEMAND that others perceive you as you dictate - it's not about names.

I can demand that others see me as a fabulously kind and generous person (for egs), but I'm going to be horribly disappointed because that's not going to be how others will perceive me. Some might, but most won't.

Legislating that others toe whichever line we draw in relation to our self-perception is unworkable. And if that line is constantly in flux and therefore unknowable except to the individual (hence my use of the term solipsism), it's not just unworkable - it's ****ing insane. And if those fluxing lines are drawn by EVERYONE, we may as well shoot ourselves now and skip the utter chaos which will result.

 

SCOTUS is a conservative court and their decisions are driven as much by conservative ideology as the constitution. Not much wrong with that, as it is pretty much what the Warren court did. The difference is that we will bide our time while working with the court until it swings the other way. Your sides reaction to the Warren court was to go absolutely batshit crazy and flouted and fought them at every turn.

 

Warren was my Governor when I was a young man.

Democrats ran the show most of the time starting in 1933 When FDR came up with packing the Supreme Court. Democrats are radicals. This nation needs sane people in Government like Trump and not nut cases like Biden.

The issue earlier was the then radical 6th circuit that covers CA among western states. They were batshit hard core left wingers until the past several years. You do understand that Warren died many many years ago I hope.