Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Straw Man Arguments In Support of Fordham

Straw Man Arguments In Support of Fordham

I really try not to get into Twitter arguments.

But when Bridgette Dunlap of Fordham Law School objected to my tweet linking to an article at The Daily Caller, OPINION: Shame and censorship at Fordham, well, I took the bait.

Bridgette, a post-graduate public interest Fellow, was one of the people who circulated the petition to the President of Fordham which was the subject of my post, Fordham Law Profs try to leverage Coulter dispute into funding for Vagina Monologues.

She made classic straw man arguments, asserting that I accused the Fordham administration of “censorship.”  Actually, that’s not my claim.  As detailed in my post, Shame on Fordham, my position is that the administration allowed itself to be intimidated by the liberal feeding frenzy over Coulter, and in turn pressured the Fordham Republicans into self-censoring.

Here is the exchange, my first use of Storify:

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Tags:

Comments

When a honey badger comes to a cat fight …

    Estragon in reply to LukeHandCool. | November 27, 2012 at 1:41 pm

    Never underestimate the Gyno-warrior-maidens of Lesbos, their response to patriarchal facts is to shrill ever more loudly until the testes retract in self-preservation.

    You understand, of course, that the Professor’s repeated references to objective reality are a form of rape, don’t you? He is trying to forcibly penetrate her mind with an unwelcome truth which functions as a symbolic phallus, a talisman of male-dominated society blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah, etc.

heh, “post-graduate public interest Fellow”? Professional student I guess, cf. Sandra Fluke….

If conservative colleges shut out conservatives for fear of losing liberal donations, perhaps we need to do the same to liberal colleges. Organize alumni at every campus to use the exact same methods at the multitude of liberal bastions of (bad) education, and direct their funding to a conservative college, if there are any.

(and I like the Amazon link on the side … I used it … didn’t buy anything this time, but that helps me remember)

At the end of the day the liberal feeding frenzy prevented Ann Coulter from freely speaking.

And honestly; freely speaking as a 52 year old liberated, self-made woman witnessing this young and spoiled college kid-who thinks receiving free contraception is the victorious feminists achievement over all mankind-opine about justice and free speech from the comforts of her Protected Class status I am appalled at what has become of my gender.

Mz Dunlap, She is Womyns hears hers roars Sugar Daddy Government gives hers more, more, more.

    BannedbytheGuardian in reply to syn. | November 27, 2012 at 6:00 pm

    I just read an interview with Helen Reddy.

    Unlike todays young thangs Helen was very much a self made woman . She earnt a living whilst raising a young child ifar from home & family & definitely no food stamps.

    She made it to the top during which she had the usual entertainment industry drug addict husband . She herself never ever lost her grace & retired about 20 years ago . Now as a 70 year old grandmother she as answered the call of her fans & is performing again .

Ms Dunlap seems confused whose “free speech” rights are at issue. Ann Coulter was being paid because the College Republicans chose to have her speak. They paid into those student funds same as the uber lib students. That there were no trips to the fainting couch when the infanticide advocate was chosen to speak at the school tells you all you need to know about whose speech rights are protected at Fordham.

Ann Coulter thrives on this kind of publicity, she’s going to be just fine. Every time Ms. Dunlap gets the vapors, Ann Coulter smiles. Meanwhile, Fordham’s Republican students are being taught “implicitly” to shut up and sit in the corner.

Ms. Dunlap believes “free speech” does not mean others have to pay for speech they find objectionable.

Any one want to bet that she does NOT think “reproductive freedom” means others to pay have to pay for contraception and abortions they find immoral?

    SmokeVanThorn in reply to SmokeVanThorn. | November 27, 2012 at 3:59 pm

    “Any one want to bet that she does NOT think “reproductive freedom” means others to pay have to pay for contraception and abortions they find immoral?” should read “Any one want to bet that she does NOT think “reproductive freedom” means others have to pay for contraception and abortions they find immoral?”

    I wish there was a way to edit prior posts.

I am beginning to think it is time (being as we are now in the age of rule by fiat) to take 50% of all college professors and 75% of all post graduate students and force them to become plumbers or electricians or house painters or auto mechanics. I graduated from college 38 years ago and since then I have had far more use for the listed trades than I have for professors with PhD’s in Latin American Lesbian Literature.

The world would be a far better place.

From her tweet [whatever] profile:

“Almost-lawyer, former-artist, writer, activist, & contraception zealot. Human Rights Fellow @LeitnerCenter @FordhamLawNYC (opinions mine)”

Another Sandra Fluk wannabe. She wants free contraceptives. I say take her up on her wish. Just make it permanent as in “tubes tied”.

No one should waste their time arguing with idiots.

Another embarrassment to women everywhere.

BannedbytheGuardian | November 27, 2012 at 6:16 pm

Fordham policy did allow for contraceptives . However the script had to be rendered off campus because the college pharmacy did not stock them (presumably.)

This was not good enough for Bridgette who has been on a crusade since 2010 & must be upset the far less attractive Fluke is entered in Who WAnts To Be Time Person Of The Year & not she .

Outfluked.

This Brigitte person sounds rather like an idiot.
Every school has lots of people it invites which are paid by student fees, should everyone that someone on campus disagrees with be disinvited?

I’m no fan of Ann Coulter, but I defend her right to come on a campus to give a spech, if small headed people like Brigitte don’t like Coulter, fine, don’t attend coulter’s speech, but this Brigitte person is basically acting like an intolerant bigot, wanting to silence someone she doesn’t agree with so that it doesn’t allow others who are curious about Coulter to listen to Coulter. While I don’t agree with Coulter on many things, I know I would have liked to listen to her speech as well as even ask questions of Coulter.

Seriously, if Brigitte is so concerned, how about she head down to her campus library, I’m sure there are books there that are absolute disgusting, bigotry abound written in them, those books were bought by campus funds as well, maybe she should petition to burn them so no one can read them!

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend