Re:Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
by josephcsible on Sunday February 06, 2022 @08:48PM
(#30239166)
I don't see how that quote addresses it. Wouldn't the relevant right be a "right not to hear", which he doesn't mention?
> You don't have to listen to anything anyone has to say
If you're a student, and it's in the state mandated curriculum, then you do.
> it's also possible to sideline something enough that it is effectively censored without being outright forbidden.
I 100% agree with this.
Re:Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
by Sebb767 on Sunday February 06, 2022 @08:59PM
(#30239243)
> I don't see how that quote addresses it. Wouldn't the relevant right be a "right not to hear", which he doesn't mention?
You're right, I misread your comment. He really does not differenciate this clearly, despite having examples for both cases.
Re:Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
by rayiner on Sunday February 06, 2022 @11:02PM
(#30240242)
That’s completely inapposite to the point being made above. Choosing a curriculum is about curation—it has nothing at all to do with free speech, neither in the legal sense, nor in the broader “free speech values” sense.
> [...] he noted that there exists not just a right to speak but a right to hear. “To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker.”
But this is of course a gray area. You don't have to listen to anything anyone has to say, but it's also possible to sideline something enough that it is effectively censored without being outright forbidden.