Comments (3)

All Trinitonian Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • J

    JRFeb 17, 2019 at 12:04 am

    Lmao the above comment mentions Dean Tuttle as if the man isn’t known for ignoring minority students’ grievances. Good article.

  • J

    JBFeb 15, 2019 at 4:11 pm

    There’s a lot wrong with this article and I would love to spend the next 20 minutes dissecting it, but that job has already been done. Head over to Dean Tuttle’s blog and read “Sticks and Stones and Tigers for Liberty,” which he wrote shortly before D’Souza spoke on campus. The Dean advocated attending the talks and debating with the speaker during the Q&A. A similar method was advocated by the Trinitonian in the piece “Disrupting D’Souza.” It seems that the Trinity administration is squarely against your conclusions in this post.

    That’s not to say Dean Tuttle agreed with what D’Souza spoke about. I attended that talk and spoke with the dean shortly after the talk ended. He did not have positive things to say about the speaker. Neither did the handful of students who challenged D’Souza during the Q&A. There was hardly a chorus of dissenting students; in fact, most the auditorium was filled with non-students. Many students had a problem that D’Souza was invited, yet very few of them showed up to expose him. Instead of asking why these speakers are allowed in the first place, perhaps you should question why there wasn’t a line of dissenters ready to argue with D’Souza once the floor was opened to Q&A.

  • A

    Angelique Lopez '22Feb 14, 2019 at 2:26 pm

    Milo isn’t a white nationalist, and I don’t think YCT’s speakers would be able to shut down anyone’s arguments voices because of the color of their skin, nor would they want to. Simply stating things does not “actively” shut down the voices of undocumented immigrants, unless the speaker is explicitly calling his audience to “actively suppress the free speech of another.” Unless D’Souza did this, he is not responsible for others’ actions. And even if people didn’t try to counter D’Souza’s statements because they were afraid of being “reported to ICE,” I’m sure others would be able to make a counterargument if they had any.

    Please define “harmful ideologies” because unless D’Souza explicitly called for the violence or harassment of others, or explicitly threatened anyone, I think he should welcome to exercise his freedom of speech here at Trinity, whether I disagree with him or not.

    In general, people are responsible for their own actions. If we start saying that certain people’s words are harmful in that they might influence others indirectly, that could lead to a dangerous downward spiral into certain unwanted censorship of things that aren’t all that harmful unless others allow them to be to their own persons.

Activate Search
Your “free speech” is denying mine