People who don't understand the First Amendment, Northern Kentucky University Professor Edition

[rebeccafrog]

Destroying someone else's property is not an exercise of your First Amendment rights, and if you're teaching that it is, you should seriously be sacked, even if you do teach British Literature, and not Constitutional Law. In order for destruction of property to be an exercise of your First Amendment rights, it needs to be your property that you are

Comments

[avinsen]

Just goes to show you: There's stupidity on both sides of the issue.

Personally, I'm pro-choice. But I am certainly not pro-vandalism, and not pro-misinformation. In fact, I believe that the students who helped take down the crosses are victims as well. After all, this was a school official who was telling them it was their right to free speech. Hopefully, they will have learned the difference.

[anonymous]

I had the same thought.

If destroying the display is free speech, then how is bombing an unoccupied abortion clinic NOT free speech? This is the kind of sloppy thinking (from people who SHOULD know better,) that alarms me about so much of academia and the left. I wouldn't have been shocked in the least if this incident had happened at our old alma mater.
-R

Insipid pride in nothing

[anonymous]

All I can say is what a great day it will be when we have an Theocracy or at least an Amish Republic in which civility, intelligence and caring are all inclusive and killing babies and promoting self destructive behaviors in the name of freedom are excluded. Yea for God!
Yahoo for Jesus!