If we leave the education of our children to liberal public school and prep school teachers, we should not be shocked when they ignore our constitution and suppress freedom of speech. These children have been indoctrinated  to believe that you should not be allowed to offend anyone with your speech unless the offended person is conservative.

Recently, a federal judge visited Stanford Law School to address the Federalist Society chapter. The Federalist Society is a conservative non-partisan organization dedicated to fostering open and balanced debate about the fundamental principles of freedom, federalism and the role of the judiciary. The topic of the Judge’s speech was “Covid, Guns and Twitter.”

As one would expect from today’s “snowflake” law students, there was strong opposition to the speech. Protests outside a speech and occasional jeering inside the auditorium are signs of a healthy society. In this instance, the “entitled snowflakes” were not willing to listen to opposing viewpoints and they were determined to prevent others from hearing the judge’s comments. These disruptors began screaming and throwing all kinds of slurs in order to force the speaker to leave the event.

After the Federal Judge attempted unsuccessfully to speak, Stanford Associate Dean for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, Tirean Steinbach entered into the fray. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that a person with her title is not going to have sympathy for conservative viewpoints.

Tirien Steinbach Associate Dean for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Dean Steinbach asked the question of the judge: “is the juice worth the squeeze?” The gist of her statement was that if your speech caused the “snowflakes” to feel unsafe, you should probably not give the speech. She pretended to defend freedom of speech but she allowed the protesters to end the meeting since the viewpoints being shared by the Judge were offensive to them.

It is sad that today’s students are being taught, by people like Dean Steinbach, that left wing facism is acceptable as long as it is used against conservative voices. 

Look back at history and remember Steinbach’s question. Abraham Lincoln was repeatedly asked if his fight to end slavery in the south was “worth the squeeze.” Lincoln’s speeches were tearing our nation apart but he ignored those telling him he was upsetting the apple cart. Who knows what the outcome would have been if he had backed off in his opposition to slavery.

Winston Churchill was asked if his refusal to negotiate with Hitler was worth the squeeze. Several members of his war-time cabinet wanted him to tone down his rhetoric against the “Austrian house painter.” Churchill did not worry about offending Hitler but continued to express his belief that Great Britain should remain free. 

Throughout history, the countries that experienced the most freedom usually had the most freedom of speech. The freedom to express oneself is baked into the American DNA. We may not like people protesting against our favorite politician, but we defend their right to do so as long as the politician is not denied their right to speak.

In most cases the defenders of those that cancel speakers are not being honest. I doubt the Associate Dean for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion would  allow students to interrupt the speech of a Black Lives Matter supporter.

Never be deceived. This is not about treating people fairly. These “snowflake” law students are fascists that are happy to force you to follow their rules and dogmas. They have been coddled so long and as a result they cannot withstand the mental anguish of a true debate. Just like a snowflake in nature, they melt with the sunshine of free speech.

Bob Spencer
Manatee Herald

Similar Posts