Ace, on the meaning of Gellerpalooza in Texas (n.b., an F-bomb ahoy, and emphasis in the original):
Now, as a personal matter, I have had sharp differences with Ms. Gellar. We do not get along.As Gino has pointed out, Pamela Geller is not a particularly nice person. I don't give her much thought generally because, in the main, I've got better things to think about. Chances are, you have better things to think about as well. The beauty of truly free speech is that you can ignore the speech of others, or offer your own speech to counter it.
But this is entirely besides the point.
Americans, acting under the influence of America, were fucking shot at by crazed religious cultists seeking to impose a cancerous religious lunacy on America.
One does not "support" someone's right to free speech by name-calling them and advertising how far one believes they fall outside the smug Upper Middle Class (leftist-dominated) Consensus.
One supports free speech by supporting those who speak freely.
I am so disgusted by how so many alleged thinkers seem to care more about social positioning than actual thought.
I should not advertise any hostility I may have towards Ms. Gellar to prove I'm "among the acceptable ones."
Acceptable to whom? Who is making this list?
We all engage in self-censorship from time to time, and we all tend to pick our battles. It's usually easier to let someone you disagree with prattle on, even if you might personally wish they'd shut up and take their ignorance and irrationality somewhere else. The danger we face now is that many of those who are doing the prattling, and many of their exemplars who have the larger microphones, aren't willing to fight for your right to speak. Word to the wise -- you might want to speak up now.
10 comments:
my saying Geller is David Duke with implants and needs to be shouted/shamed out of the room is my free speech as well.
i am speaking up.
i wonder what the coverage would be like if david duke held a shindig of some sort and a black panther took it to heart and brought a gun with him...
What else has Geller done besides this stunt? I saw the winner of the competition--a rendition of M. with a sword about to attack--and thought "you know, if I were Muslim, I'd sigh and work to point out how we're not all like that." Basically my same response to the Westboro "Baptists".
It is free speech, Gino. And I'm glad you're saying it.
My issue isn't with you. It's with the brigade of "I'm a free speech absolutist, but" commenters. Either you're for free speech, or you're not. I know where you stand. Unfortunately, I also now know where a lot of other people stand. It's been a moment of clarity.
Geller used to delete comments on her blog if you made a good case in oposition to her. Shes no free speecher herself.
I am sure you're right about that, Gino. Still would like to see more people defend her right to be a horrible person. The Gellers and the WBC jerks that Bubba referenced are the hard cases that test our commitment to the 1st Amendment.
I really hate the WBC in particular; I think they are the most cynical bastards around. I love it when the motorcycle guys chase them away. But I don't want them dead, no matter how horrible they are.
Her right to be a bad person saying bad things is not under attack. There is no movement by anybody to bring the force of govt against her. So, the 1stA argument does not apply in the least. Its a red herring.
But she is a provocateur inviting violence in order to increase her standing. She is being rightfully challenged on her behavior, which is what a morally responsible society of free speech should be doing.
What you are doing is challenging her with your own voice and viewpoint. Good for you! Call her a fraud and a charlatan. Denounce her with fervor. Tell her off good. I'm with you. The gunmen who sought to kill her and the others? No excuse. To hell with them.
And I respectfully disagree about the red herring argument. Free speech, and its concomitant responsibilities, are not just an issue concerning government force. If a private entity denies you the right to express your opinion by force, I have an issue with that, too. More speech, not less.
thats where the government comes in, in this case in the form of govt militia bearing arms.
once again, her free speech was never violated. it was defended and guaranteed against the peeps she goaded into violence.
those like me say: bitch, you need to be more responsible.
she screams: you're violating my free speech.
red herring.
There's an awfully thin line between "bitch, you need to be more responsible" and "kill the bitch." I don't accept the "goaded into violence" notion at all. There's no excuse or justification for traveling a thousand miles to kill someone because you hate what they say or do.
Post a Comment