loaves and fish
At last we have the most lovely of lovely days, clear sky, the Bay is smooth but not flat, the Navy's littoral combat ship Sea Fighter FSF-1 just glided by 7H and is now entering The Pass on her way out to sea. One off, twin hull, she's a strange craft, I'll be surprised if she ever finds a mate.
Every day is a beautiful day, and if it isn't one thing it's another: sometimes it's supper on 7H porch an early spring evening, another Time it's a favorite breakfast. My favorite restaurant was the one that a generation ago was here where Harbour Village is these years, their Sunday Brunch that included the Eggs Benedict station and the buffet table piled high with fried oysters. We came over from Apalachicola and took my parents to enjoy that Sunday Brunch any number of Times years ago; well, it was ages ago, wasn't it, because my father will have been dead thirty years this coming July 2023.
Pretty much I refrain from socio-political rantings. Jonathan Turley's column arrives here by email at least once a day, and politically I disagree with everything he says, just as I disagree with everything you think and say socially, religiously, theologically, politically, and probably morally; but lately Turley's been taking on the degradation of free speech on America's college campuses, and he's right. Someone said (I read that it was not Voltaire as you thought, but an author misquoting Voltaire, but if you want to insist it was Voltaire, suit yourself) "I disagree with everything you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it," and, except for inciting violence or damaging, hurting others, the current movement of officialdom and/or violence to curb freedom of expression is beyond the pale. Colleges firing professors for voicing politically incorrect views. A self-righteous audience shouting down a speaker who's been invited to voice a differing viewpoint. A college news editor (scroll down) calling for violence to put down peaceful expression. Kindness counts in life, whether the current generation of pathetic immaturity agrees or not, courtesy, kindness, thoughtfulness, consideration, generosity, the OT Hebrew word is חֶסֶד chesed, lovingkindness, mercy, the KJV has it charity, some newer versions say steadfast love, the NT Greek word is ἀγάπη agape, love, mercy, charity, kindness, courtesy; it's common decency, without which the human race is not worth the powder to blow us all to hell.
The issue is abortion, not abortion itself, that's a medical procedure, but citizens expressing views about abortion, pro-life and pro-choice. Set in the concrete of absolute certainty, positions are deadly inimical, both American political parties make it their foundational political stand. And me?, being neither a woman, nor a person of reproductive age, nor a man of absolutes, and having dear and highly respected friends (and no doubt, relatives) on each side, I choose to stand back, listen, hear, think, and try to understand each side, especially the side that I'm otherwise inclined to rail against.
It's too bad feelings are vehement unto violence, not on the issue but against each other. There is integrity in both viewpoints, one side certain it is trying to protect the innocent unborn (but not willing to pay for society to feed, house, clothe and doctor them once they are born into hopelessness), the other side trying to protect women's right to make their own decisions without the evil oversight of Big Brother.
My viewpoint is tilted by my contempt and utter hatred for encroaching authoritative government moving to bully people and make their personal and moral decisions for them; which, except as it has been warped in America, is the opposite of political conservatism. But J Turley is right on this one, acting to officially and/or violently deprive others of their right to peaceful free expression, speech, is the new way of self-righteousness in America, a way of shame. This is war, so to speak, an ant bed of insects turning on ourselves. And here we are wanting to reassert our post-WW2 leadership of the free world. Astonished, puzzled, the world shakes its head and laughs.
JONATHAN TURLEY
She added that “Yale should be more cognizant about the environment it fosters for women. We don’t need perfunctory celebrations of the anniversary of Yale’s women that accompany endorsements of misogynist dialogue.”
The editorial perfectly captures the rising intolerance and orthodoxy on our campuses. Nam insists that even allowing such debates is “an insult to our personhood, experience and rights.”
This is consistent with other editorials that we have previously discussed. A Berkeley columnist denounced civility and called for violent resistance. Dartmouth faculty and students demanded that the university shutdown a conservative newspaper. Wellesley editorsendorsed shutting down conservative speakers and said that “violence may be warranted.” We have also documented repeated incidents where university newspapers have fired writers and editors for questioning Covid masks, challenging systemic racism claims, or holding other opposing views.
There has also been a repeated attack on civility as racist or reactionary. Even reporters at National Public Radio (NPR) have denounced civility as a “weapon wielded by the powerful.” Hillary Clinton has called for the end of civility toward any Republicans.
This tirade at Yale against free speech captures many of these elements from the attack on civility to the view of opposing speech as harmful. Given the increasingly anti-free speech culture in our elementary through high schools, it is not surprising to see this rising generation of censors. These students have been constantly told that free speech is harmful and that they should not have to be harmed by the exposure to opposing views.
The irony is that it is important to hear Nam’s views, which can be the basis for productive discourse — the type of civil discourse that she rejects. I would oppose any effort to silence her. This is precisely the type of open discussion that is valuable on our campuses. However, it should occur in an environment of civility and tolerance — values that Nam clearly rejects.
The Yale editorial gives an insight into what educators have created in this speech-phobic, viewpoint-intolerant generation.