College students who participate in walkouts could be suspended or expelled under a new measure passed by the Tennessee General Assembly on Monday.
The Charlie Kirk Act, named for the late conservative activist, addresses free speech on college campuses.
HB 1476/ SB 1741 would require colleges and universities to sign the University of Chicago’s policy on freedom of speech — and prohibit administrations from uninviting a speaker based on their opposition to abortion or LGBTQ rights.
I mean, I’d still plan walkouts anyway if I was a student. Fuck it.
I’m pretty sure walk outs are ever really “allowed” it just look bad arrested hundreds of kids
They can’t penalize you for walking out if you just drop out of school entirely, get a GED, and leave the shitty state to work somewhere else.
yes they will.
"Charlie Kirk was someone who encouraged everyone to love others,”
I audibly burst out laughing. Ether this fucker had no idea who he was before he died, or he is lying his ass off.
Conservatives sure do hate freedom
For people who also bitch about echo chambers and safe spaces, they sure do love them.
Almost like…
Nothing says “free speech” like banning protest.
Just to talk through conservatives’ blatant hypocrisy:
Conservativism is correlated generally with a lack of empathy (general scientific essay collecting evidence here). For people who fundamentally lack empathy, one explanation is that they literally cannot tell the difference between “free speech” and “my free speech.” To them, they cannot understand why any valid moral goal would be different from theirs. That implies that any exercise of free speech by them and those like them is valid, and free speech by others with different goals would be invalid.
So likely they see Charlie Kirk’s “censorship” as a free speech issue, and not LGBTQ censorship, because they actually lack the cognitive tools to understand the contradiction.
I’m not sure what the solution is here, short of sending Henry Cavill to the predominantly-male conservatives who think this way, and giving them a long, romantic kiss to make them realize they are also a little LGBTQ, to expand their sympathy base to make up for their lack of empathy. But I doubt Henry Cavill would volunteer for this particular task.
I can say I feel this when talking with people who are upset at protests. Its kinda exhausting when they don’t get how rights won’t apply to anyone if they are selective. I literally have gotten them close. So you see then a cop could pull you over because he does not like you and have you shipped overseas and you would never get a chance to prove your citizenship. Response I get. Oh common do you know any cop that would do that. me. sigh. after taking a long long time to get them sorta kinda getting the idea.
The solution is to focus on our education system and possibly start requiring school before people can do certain things. I think for example in order to have kids you should be required to take a parenting class for a period of time. I mainly bring this up because my wife is a teacher and at least half of her students each year have parents who either don’t want to be a parent or have zero idea how to be a parent. Some form of required education will be a barrier between those who don’t want kids and useful for those who don’t know what to do. My wife and I fostered kids for a period of time and we were not only required to take classes before we could but we had to redo those classes each year, and that was just to foster kids not have them for example.
Its not perfect but too many people are having kids and not doing anything for themselves to be prepared for that, they just rely on the schools to do everything and there is only so much a teacher can do for these kids. My wife who teaches elementary aged kids has had on numerous occasions to teach children how to wipe their own butts because their parents won’t do it themselves, this isn’t something a teacher should have to do but its either she explains it to them or deals with a stinky child all day who is upset because of it. This is just one example and there are numerous others.
The problem with “required lessons” for things is always, how do you keep it unbiased and directed. You can’t always assume a benevolent leadership, so how do these required lessons resist becoming political tools to suppress minorities.
For instance, a required teaching on informed voting sounds great on paper, but requiring a course before voting adversely affects lower income individuals even if the material is unbiased, but over time these courses would be used by the party in charge to “inform” the voters why their side is better.
The same could be said for required parenting classes or anything else. Not saying we shouldn’t do it, but it’s not nearly as easy as setting up some courses and making people take them.
The same could be said for required parenting classes or anything else. Not saying we shouldn’t do it, but it’s not nearly as easy as setting up some courses and making people take them.
Also, how would enforcement work? Not only would it predominantly affect lower income families, (who likely don’t have the money for required classes, and don’t have the time to take them even if they’re free), but what would be the penalty for refusing? There is no good answer, because every single answer will adversely affect the children that the program is trying to help.
You fine them? Congrats, that’s less money for the kid’s care, and is going to make poorer parents struggle to afford basic necessities even more than they already do. It’s going to disproportionately affect poorer people, because they’ll have less disposable income and will be hit harder by fines. It also means richer families can just buy their way out of the classes; if a fine is the only punishment, it’s only a punishment for the poor.
You jail them? Congrats, now you have deprived a child of their parents during their most formative years.
You take their kids away? Congrats, now you have flooded the foster system (which is already on the brink of collapse, and rife with abuse) and institutionalized a “poor family to rich family” child trafficking pipeline.
Additionally, lots of the “parents who don’t want to be involved” are likely too burnt out from working two or three jobs, or actively resent their kids because they had them too young. For instance, lots of teenage parents end up resenting their children in their 20’s, simply because they’re seeing all of their friends go out and party while they’re struggling to afford a babysitter. If you want to make that resentment a thousand times worse, start penalizing the parents further for not having the time to take parenting classes.
Finally… If your answer to the above question is “just make them stop having kids before they take the class…” How? I want to really think about that question. How? Are we going to surgically implant AFAB babies with fallopian tube switches, which only get unlocked after the parenting classes have been taken? Maybe every AMAB baby gets a vasectomy by default, which then gets reversed after they take the class? Because outside of mass-mandated surgical procedures, (good luck getting any surgeons to agree to this, by the way…) you can’t stop biology. The old conservative “abstinence is the only way to stop pregnancy” arguments have been disproven more times than I can count. But every other method requires active effort on someone’s part.
Yeah the only way is free meals at schools so kids go for free food and then stay at after school programs, any conservative alternative is just genocide to be frank, but people don’t like it when you call genocide what it is
Conservatism is a form of neurodivergence, change my mind.
Dont you put that evil on us Ricky Bobby. We got enough shit to dig through to function. Im not going to tell you your wrong, im not qualified to make that judgement. Find a better word as to not conflate the alphabet soup of neurodivergence with seemingingly functional members of society who lack empathy. Psychopath seems to be along the better verbaige, but workshop it for a bit.
Yes, mental illness is famously always good and quirky.
But I doubt Henry Cavill would volunteer for this particular task.
I mean… had anyone asked? Maybe offer him some Warhammer minis?
The Henry Cahill solution might be among the best things I’ve seen on lemmy.
Gotta account for preferences though, I know women swoon over him but they night apply to men, speaking as one of them.
Don’t give them a pass, they choose to be this way
Just to talk through
Do you wanna alienate the opposition? That’s a perfect way to start.
Just for extra Irony Points, this is being done in the name of one of the supposed free-speech-maximalist DEBATEMEBRO types.
Not that I ever thought that he was genuine about it, either, but FFS. If anyone ever wants to see one of the biggest cases of conservative “free speech maximalism” in action, it’s someone like fElon and the way he runs Xitter.
Even worse…. You can’t walk out, which is turning free speech into compelled speech. You must listen or risk being expelled.
Students are creative; if they can’t walk out, they’ll all bring headphones.
Yeah, I think even Charlie would have been against this.
No, he was all for hypocrisy.
Including gang violence?
gurgling sounds
That’s a wrap, people.
A conservative blogger, and a dogshit one at that
That’s all this bloke was
Authoritarianism is an admission of abject weakness.
White supremacists are the weakest and most brittle snowflakes.
I would organize a walkout just to F with them
Walkout in honor of Charlie.
- Distribute “Fuck Charlie Kirk” t-shirts
- Go to the conservative speaking engagement in said shirts
- Watch their heads spin when they can’t figure out if they’re supposed to make you leave or make you stay
Nah, stay. Just have loud conversations amongst the audience ignoring anyone onstage/with a mic. Ignore anything that is said.
Make the speaker angry enough to leave.
Tell them to ‘do a charlie kirk’ chant ‘get kirked’ at them. Loudly ask who in the room brought a gun, ask thr last question kirk was asked.
In order to keep the memory of their hero alive, all speaking engagements covered by this act must take place outside in an area with long, unobstructed sight lines.
Surrounded by high towers…
And security is on a smoke break.
I’m on smoko, so leave me alone!
Serving various foods with holes. Donuts, Swizz cheese, etc.
Donuts, Sweiß cheesefood™, an urban area’s Grindr catalog during GOP events, millions of deluded bigots’ starved & softened brains, etc.
FTFY
Can someone remind me what America used to do to fascists?
Invite them to work in the government?
Or you mean before that? With the bayonets?
Give them government jobs and shield them from prosecution.
Ask Charlie.
The GOP is going to continue pushing anti-American legislation. At least in this case they’re not pretending otherwise with some subversive name for it.
Putting an underwhelming big mouth on a pedestal and building discriminatory legislation around that shitcunt? It’s as American as it gets.
Kill them or get on your knees. No other option.
“Tennessee’ Charlie Kirk Act bans political protest and limits free speech.”
“The Charlie Kirk Act…
addressesrestricts free speech”Fixed that for them
and prohibit administrations from uninviting a speaker based on their opposition to abortion or LGBTQ rights
Why only opposition to these issues? Are administrations free to prohibit speakers in support of these issues? How is this not governmental viewpoint suppression in violation of the constitutional protection of freedom of speech? This is insane.
It’s exactly that, they just don’t care
