Published response to "reconfiguration of LDS politics"

[Scott Lloyd]

4 minutes ago, Duncan said:

of course!!!!!! They haven't started construction yet, even though we have nice weather for it to start, not sure what the hold up is. I always felt bad for the Stake President, he got put in in Oct. 2014 and so every Stake Conference until last Aug. when it was officially announced he had to tell us that he doesn't know when the Temple will be approved and "please don't walk out or shame me on facebook or anything". Then it was approved and now he doesn't know when construction will begin, he called the Temple Dept. and nothing yet so who knows what the hitch is. 

I'll venture a guess that it's a local zoning commission and/or opposition from unsympathetic local residents. That seems to be the unfortunate pattern that plays out again and again in far-flung locales.

Somebody told Brigham Young that he hated to see the foundation walls for the Salt Lake Temple being uncovered after the Johnston's Army invasion crisis was averted, because every time the Latter-day Saints endeavor to build a temple, "the bells of hell begin to ring."

Brigham replied, "I want to hear them ring again."

 

[Rajah Manchou]

8 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You don't get to tell people what they may and may not speak out on. This is not the Berkeley campus.

Interesting you bring that up. Sure, this is not the Berkeley campus, but do you suppose Milo would be welcome to say the things he often says on BYU campus, or here? I suspect he'd get put on limited rather quickly, if not completely banned.

I suspect even quoting some of the things he says, or posting a link to photos of his latest "comeback party" is risking some sort of warning. 

Strippers, AK-47s and ‘feminism is cancer’ shirts: Inside Milo Yiannopoulos’ comeback party

Maybe Berkeley was right in limiting his access to their campus.

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Interesting you bring that up. Sure, this is not the Berkeley campus, but do you suppose Milo would be welcome to say the things he often says on BYU campus, or here? I suspect he'd get put on limited rather quickly, if not completely banned.

I suspect even quoting some of the things he says, or posting a link to photos of his latest "comeback party" is risking some sort of warning. 

Strippers, AK-47s and ‘feminism is cancer’ shirts: Inside Milo Yiannopoulos’ comeback party

Maybe Berkeley was right in limiting his access to their campus.

It's not just about Milo. It's Ann Coulter too. And mob rule. And a weak-willed university administration succumbing to it. And violence and vandalism. And the liberal -fascist movement. And snowflakes who can't stand to have their thinking challenged without throwing temper tantrums. And the hypocrisy of all this taking place at an institution that touts itself as "the birthplace of the free speech movement."

Give me a break!

You know things are in a sorry state when even Bill Mahr is put off by what's going on there.

 

Edited May 8, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Rajah Manchou]

29 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It's not just Milo. It's Ann Coulter too. And mob rule. And a weak-willed university administration succumbing to it. And violence and vandalism. And the liberal -fascist movement. And snowflakes who can't stand to have their thinking challenged. And the hypocrisy of all this taking place at an institution that touts itself as "the birth of the free speech movement."

Give me a break!

You know things are in a sorry state when even Bill Mahr is put off by what's going on there.

That may be true, but BYU and this board would not allow 'free speech' from those hotheads either.

The left has hypocrites, no doubt about it. But there's a hypocrisy bubbling up in the conservative movement, where edgy trolls like Milo are becoming martyrs for free speech. But if he were to come around our campus, do you suppose we'd hand him a microphone in the name of free speech?

Edited May 8, 2017 by Rajah Manchou

[Scott Lloyd]

36 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

That may be true, but BYU and this board would not allow 'free speech' from those hotheads either.

The left has hypocrites, no doubt about it. But there's a hypocrisy bubbling up in the conservative movement, where edgy trolls like Milo are becoming martyrs for free speech. But if he were to come around our campus, do you suppose we'd hand him a microphone in the name of free speech?

If the likes of Ann Coulter were to be invited (or Rush Limbaugh or Shaun Hannity or Tucker Carlson or Kellyanne Conway), would you be smashing windows, vandalizing cars, committing physical assaults, making death threats, shouting down the speaker? Would the administration allow it? If so, the university is not the sort of institution I graduated from in 1980.

And by the way, based on what I've seen allowed on this board, I don't for a moment accept your presumption that Ann Coulter would not be allowed to post here. Or Milo Yiannopoulos, for that matter.

Edited May 8, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Duncan]

27 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I'll venture a guess that it's a local zoning commission and/or opposition from unsympathetic local residents. That seems to be the unfortunate pattern that plays out again and again in far-flung locales.

Somebody told Brigham Young that he hated to see the foundation walls for the Salt Lake Temple being uncovered after the Johnston's Army invasion crisis was averted, because every time the Latter-day Saints endeavor to build a temple, "the bells of hell begin to ring."

Brigham replied, "I want to hear them ring again."

 

We had city approval and the site dedication in Dec., when I mean "we" I mean they as I wasn't part of the negotiations! hahahha! Someone said it was due to something with the new chapel that they are building on the site but that's a rumour, but i'll keep you posted!

[Scott Lloyd]

2 minutes ago, Duncan said:

We had city approval and the site dedication in Dec., when I mean "we" I mean they as I wasn't part of the negotiations! hahahha! Someone said it was due to something with the new chapel that they are building on the site but that's a rumour, but i'll keep you posted!

Seems like there's often some wrinkle that crops up, whether it's the height of the steeple, expected increase in traffic, whatever. I wish you smooth sailing, though.

[Duncan]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

Seems like there's often some wrinkle that crops up, whether it's the height of the steeple, expected increase in traffic, whatever. I wish you smooth sailing, though.

Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Rajah Manchou]

27 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

If the likes of Ann Coulter were to be invited, would you be smashing windows, vandalizing cars, committing physical assaults, shouting down the speaker? If so, the university is not the sort of institution I graduated from in 1980.

Nah, I probably wouldn't smash anything. My father and siblings are big fans, and I grew up with all the conservative talk shows playing 24/7. I haven't assaulted anyone yet.

27 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

And by the way, based on what I've seen allowed here, I don't for a moment accept your presumption that Ann Coulter would not be allowed to post here. Or Milo Yiannopoulos, for that matter.

Maybe you haven't been listening much to Milo, because there are very good reasons why people don't want him on their campuses. I'd say there's even good reason to shout him down if he were to take the stage. For example, if Milo were to be invited to BYU and said:

Milo: “We get hung up on this kind of child abuse stuff to the point where we’re heavily policing even relationships between consenting adults, you know grad students and professors at universities.”

Milo: “You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means. Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13-years-old who is sexually mature. Pedophilia is attraction to children who have not reached puberty. Pedophilia is attraction to people who don’t have functioning sex organs yet. Who have not gone through puberty. Who are too young to be able (unclear and cut off by others)…That’s not what we are talking about. You don’t understand what pedophilia is if you are saying I’m defending it because I’m certainly not.”

Milo: "I think in the gay world, some of the most important, enriching and incredibly life affirming, important shaping relationships very often between younger boys and older men, they can be hugely positive experiences for those young boys..."

I can't be certain, but I don't think it would fly at BYU.

Edited May 8, 2017 by Rajah Manchou

[RevTestament]

58 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

That may be true, but BYU and this board would not allow 'free speech' from those hotheads either.

The left has hypocrites, no doubt about it. But there's a hypocrisy bubbling up in the conservative movement, where edgy trolls like Milo are becoming martyrs for free speech. But if he were to come around our campus, do you suppose we'd hand him a microphone in the name of free speech?

No. BYU is a religious institution and Milo has a potty mouth. 
My guess is Ann Coulter might be allowed if some group invited her, but I strongly doubt the admin would invite her.

Sadly, I do see free speech getting limited on campuses around the nation tho. Largely by liberal snowflakes that demand safe spaces and a new radical fascist type of mentality promoted by groups such as the Muslim Student Association. These types of people don't hesitate to throw physical temper tantrums at the thought of even relatively innocuous conservative speakers such as Ben Shapiro coming to campus. This type of conservatism and free speech should be getting applauded, but instead is getting railroaded - even by college admins.

[Scott Lloyd]

52 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Nah, I probably wouldn't smash anything. My father and siblings are big fans, and I grew up with all the conservative talk shows playing 24/7. I haven't assaulted anyone yet.

Maybe you haven't been listening much to Milo, because there are very good reasons why people don't want him on their campuses. I'd say there's even good reason to shout him down if he were to take the stage. For example, if Milo were to be invited to BYU and said:

Milo: “We get hung up on this kind of child abuse stuff to the point where we’re heavily policing even relationships between consenting adults, you know grad students and professors at universities.”

Milo: “You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means. Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13-years-old who is sexually mature. Pedophilia is attraction to children who have not reached puberty. Pedophilia is attraction to people who don’t have functioning sex organs yet. Who have not gone through puberty. Who are too young to be able (unclear and cut off by others)…That’s not what we are talking about. You don’t understand what pedophilia is if you are saying I’m defending it because I’m certainly not.”

Milo: "I think in the gay world, some of the most important, enriching and incredibly life affirming, important shaping relationships very often between younger boys and older men, they can be hugely positive experiences for those young boys..."

I can't be certain, but I don't think it would fly at BYU.

I know very little about Milo. He is not the point for me. It's the idea of thugs at a supposedly progressive, liberal institution being allowed to shut down free speech.

And you say you "probably" wouldn't smash anything? How very tolerant of you. Congratulations.

Edited May 8, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

38 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

No. BYU is a religious institution and Milo has a potty mouth. 
My guess is Ann Coulter might be allowed if some group invited her, but I strongly doubt the admin would invite her.

Sadly, I do see free speech getting limited on campuses around the nation tho. Largely by liberal snowflakes that demand safe spaces and a new radical fascist type of mentality promoted by groups such as the Muslim Student Association. These types of people don't hesitate to throw physical temper tantrums at the thought of even relatively innocuous conservative speakers such as Ben Shapiro coming to campus. This type of conservatism and free speech should be getting applauded, but instead is getting railroaded - even by college admins.

Someone does get it.

Thank you!

After thought. On occasion, our own General Authorities, who have some academic stature, such as Elder Oaks and Elder Holland and President Eyring are invited as guest speakers at institutions of higher learning. How long is it going to be before some "progressive" group of thugs at a college or university is going to try -- and succeed -- to prevent the appearance of one of them because they don't like the principles and values of the Church of Jesus Christ?

 

Edited May 8, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Rajah Manchou]

32 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

Sadly, I do see free speech getting limited on campuses around the nation tho. Largely by liberal snowflakes that demand safe spaces and a new radical fascist type of mentality

These things are cyclical. You can pretty much time them to shift every 4-8 years when a new party takes office.

Michael Moore, Reverend Wright, Bill Ayers, Ward Churchill fade as conservative snowflakes melt, and then we get a whole new crop such as Richard Spencer, Mike Cernovich, Milo Yiannopoulos as liberals take up the opposition. 

There's a database that tracks these things and its not clear to me which political ideology is more quick to take offense at things people say or think. Both sides seem to be pretty good at hypocritical finger pointing.

[Scott Lloyd]

52 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

These things are cyclical. You can pretty much time them to shift every 4-8 years when a new party takes office.

Michael Moore, Reverend Wright, Bill Ayers, Ward Churchill fade as conservative snowflakes melt, and then we get a whole new crop such as Richard Spencer, Mike Cernovich, Milo Yiannopoulos as liberals take up the opposition. 

There's a database that tracks these things and its not clear to me which political ideology is more quick to take offense at things people say or think. Both sides seem to be pretty good at hypocritical finger pointing.

Can you cite any instances where thugs were smashing up colleges campuses, committing assaults and coercing university administrations into canceling lectures from visiting speakers because they were pissed off at the things Moor, Wright, Ayers, Churchill or other liberal speakers were saying? If not, then don't act like this is business as usual.

 

Edited May 8, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Rajah Manchou]

59 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I know very little about Milo. He is not the point for me. 

OK, that explains it. Milo's college speaking tours are meant to troll colleges and communities as a way to trigger protests and potentially violent events. 

Remember those white nationalists who trolled Geraldo Rivera's guests until a fight broke out? That's kinda what Milo does, and will continue to do, at college campuses across America. He's not a conservative free speech martyr, he's a troll who abuses free speech to trigger media events and build his brand as a provocateur. 

TBH, I could care less where Milo speaks. But I don't blame Berekely for disinviting him.

[Rajah Manchou]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Can you cite any instances where thugs were smashing up colleges campuses, committing assaults and coercing university administrations into canceling lectures from visiting speakers because they were pissed off at the things Moor, Wright, Ayers, Churchill or other liberal speakers were saying? If not, then don't act like this is business as usual.

Well, there is that time in January when a Trump supporter in a Make America Great Again cap shot a Milo protestor in the gut.

And there was that time when Milo was disinvited from speaking at the CPAC convention. And that time when Simon & Schuster cancelled his book deal. And that time Brietbart fired him from writing for them because of things that he said on Youtube. And that time when Twitter banned him for harassing other users. 

Seems like limiting Milo's free speech is business as usual, so I'm not so sure why you are singling out Berekely.

[Gray]

8 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It's not just about Milo. It's Ann Coulter too. And mob rule. And a weak-willed university administration succumbing to it. And violence and vandalism. And the liberal -fascist movement. And snowflakes who can't stand to have their thinking challenged without throwing temper tantrums. And the hypocrisy of all this taking place at an institution that touts itself as "the birthplace of the free speech movement."

Give me a break!

You know things are in a sorry state when even Bill Mahr is put off by what's going on there.

 

Fascism is a right wing movement. Protests don't constitute fascism - even mob violence (including the kind instigated by Trump supporters) isn't actually fascism. 

Milo and Coulter are white nationalist trolls and bomb throwers, not serious political thinkers. Institutions of higher learning shouldn't cater to trolls who seem to make their living riling up the baser elements of our country. 

[clarkgoble]

8 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

That may be true, but BYU and this board would not allow 'free speech' from those hotheads either.

The left has hypocrites, no doubt about it. But there's a hypocrisy bubbling up in the conservative movement, where edgy trolls like Milo are becoming martyrs for free speech. But if he were to come around our campus, do you suppose we'd hand him a microphone in the name of free speech?

I think these College Republicans are idiots for inviting people like Coulter or Milo. However also remember that the rules for state colleges like Berkeley are quite different from private schools like BYU or Yale. Further it's not just figures like Coulter or Milo facing these problems but academics like Charles Murray or more mainstream conservatives like Ben Shapiro.

[clarkgoble]

4 minutes ago, Gray said:

Fascism is a right wing movement.

Which right off the bat shows that a single spectrum of left/right is highly distorting of politics. Libertarianism and fascism are both seen as far right movement even though they are polarly opposed. Much like anarchists and marxists are both seen as far left movements.

All that said I tend to think the fascist label is thrown around a bit irresponsibly. But Trump is no more a fascist than those violent protestors at Berkeley. It has nothing to do with right/left dichotomies though and just that Trump clearly is working within the system.  

Edited May 8, 2017 by clarkgoble

[The Nehor]

11 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Then why did Obama himself promise repeatedly that "you can keep your doctor; you can keep your plan"? No less than 36 times, according to clips on the following YouTube video! Where's your long-nose Photoshop image with Obama as the subject?

 

I am not going to play the false equivalency game between the two. I do not really like either of them but Obama was hopeful that doctors would not need to change. He was wrong. Trump lies about easily checked facts repeatedly on an almost daily basis. They are not the same.

Most presidents have lied or practiced wishful thinking in their promises in some way. Some lied to get away with something. Some lied because they (rightly or wrongly) thought the lie was in the public's best interest to believe. Some lied to sell a bill of goods. Our current president lies casually and about things that do not even matter. It is a new low for the office. Again, I am not going to try pretend Trump and Obama or Trump and George W. Bush or Trump and ClInton are playing on the same field or even playing the same game.

You are trying to do what Trump did when he was criticized for supporting a dictator like Putin who does terrible things. He sputtered about how the United States was not innocent either. While true and the US has done terrible things that does not mean the US and Russia are on an equal moral playing field. Admittedly if people like Trump are now going to hold the Presidency regularly we might get there at some point but thankfully not yet.

[The Nehor]

31 minutes ago, Gray said:

Fascism is a right wing movement. Protests don't constitute fascism - even mob violence (including the kind instigated by Trump supporters) isn't actually fascism. 

Milo and Coulter are white nationalist trolls and bomb throwers, not serious political thinkers. Institutions of higher learning shouldn't cater to trolls who seem to make their living riling up the baser elements of our country. 

This. Free speech is the right to speak. Protesting that scum should not be allowed on your college campus does not qualify and it is not censorship. Let them rant on street corners or blogs instead.

[The Nehor]

31 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Which right off the bat shows that a single spectrum of left/right is highly distorting of politics. Libertarianism and fascism are both seen as far right movement even though they are polarly opposed. Much like anarchists and marxists are both seen as far left movements.

All that said I tend to think the fascist label is thrown around a bit irresponsibly. But Trump is no more a fascist than those violent protestors at Berkeley. It has nothing to do with right/left dichotomies though and just that Trump clearly is working within the system.  

Fascists do work within the system. Trump is not a fascist in the classical sense. He might be a kind of prototype now-fascist but we have to wait and see. He speaks much of the language of fascism. 'We were once great but that has been stolen from us by traitor/foreigners in our midst who must be dealt with. I will restore our former glory/make us great again.'

The main advantage Trump has over authentic fascists is that he seems to have no ideology or goals beyond winning respect and acceptance and prestige. He is also lazy. I feel sorry for the doofus. He actually thought the job was easy and was a popularity contest and once he won people would all admire and respect him. Poor fool was oblivious to the idea that presidents are mocked more then just about anyone else in America. It is part of the job. The thin-skinned simpleton keeps pretending he is still running so he can get people chanting positive slogans at him to stroke his ego.

[Scott Lloyd]

48 minutes ago, Gray said:

Fascism is a right wing movement. Protests don't constitute fascism - even mob violence (including the kind instigated by Trump supporters) isn't actually fascism. 

 

I think the thugs at Berkeley, MIddlebury College and elsewhere are being called liberal fascists because they are behaving like fascists. Endeavoring to shut down free speech is fascist behavior.

Quote

Milo and Coulter are white nationalist trolls and bomb throwers, not serious political thinkers. Institutions of higher learning shouldn't cater to trolls who seem to make their living riling up the baser elements of our country. 

So because you don't like what some people say or you don't regard them as "serious political thinkers," you excuse shutting down free speech. I find that very disturbing. Again, it's fascist-like behavior.

Not being a "serious political thinker" would rule out some contributors to this board. Shall we shut them down too?

Edited May 8, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

4 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Well, there is that time in January when a Trump supporter in a Make America Great Again cap shot a Milo protestor in the gut.

And there was that time when Milo was disinvited from speaking at the CPAC convention. And that time when Simon & Schuster cancelled his book deal. And that time Brietbart fired him from writing for them because of things that he said on Youtube. And that time when Twitter banned him for harassing other users. 

Seems like limiting Milo's free speech is business as usual, so I'm not so sure why you are singling out Berekely.

I'm not singling out Berkeley. I have in mind MIddlebury College and anywhere else where thugs of any political stripe are shutting down free speech.

And I noticed you dodged my question, which was:

Quote

Can you cite any instances where thugs were smashing up colleges campuses, committing assaults and coercing university administrations into canceling lectures from visiting speakers because they were pissed off at the things Moor, Wright, Ayers, Churchill or other liberal speakers were saying? If not, then don't act like this is business as usual.

And Clark Goble, who clearly doesn't like Milo or Coulter, raised a good point when he said:

Quote

... Remember that the rules for state colleges like Berkeley are quite different from private schools like BYU or Yale. Further it's not just figures like Coulter or Milo facing these problems but academics like Charles Murray or more mainstream conservatives like Ben Shapiro.

 

 

0

[Rajah Manchou]

47 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

I think these College Republicans are idiots for inviting people like Coulter or Milo. However also remember that the rules for state colleges like Berkeley are quite different from private schools like BYU or Yale. Further it's not just figures like Coulter or Milo facing these problems but academics like Charles Murray or more mainstream conservatives like Ben Shapiro.

Let's say I set up an LLC called Manchou Media Inc. with a business model along the lines of "making the lives of journalists, professors, politicians, feminists, Black Lives Matter activists, and other professional victims a living hell." And then I went around to liberal colleges with the intention of camping out for a week or a month standing on a soapbox and prodding the liberal snowflakes to the point where they wanted to wring my neck, would the college be obligated by law to let me cash in?

Milo Yiannopoulos is Starting a New, Ugly, For-profit Troll Circus

It stopped being about free speech a looong time ago. Now they are just cashing in on the protections the Constitution provides for their immature theatrics. I think conservatives would benefit from nipping these embarrassments in the bud.