MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Yale Students Totally Cool With Repealing the First Amendment

Watch students at Yale University sign a petition to repeal the First Amendment.

adapted from Kim Davies/Flickradapted from Kim Davies/FlickrStudents are in a hurry between classes. Petitions are low-stakes and non-binding. And the guy behind the clipboard seems so nice! So maybe we can call the following video a simple demonstration of how people will sign just about anything, right? Right? Because the alternative explanation is that Yale University is rife with young people who are totally cool with repealing the First Amendment. 

In under one hour on a main stretch of Yale's campus, video maker Ami Horowitz collected 50 signatures on a petition to say see-ya-later to that whole free speech thing Americans have been yammering on about for a few centuries. 

Of course, we don't know how many students declined to sign. And we don't know that those who did actually took Horowitz seriously—Reason's resident Yale alum, Katherine Mangu-Ward, said that student groups there used to circulate fake petitions all the time. Maybe everyone is in on the joke! 

And yet... this is the same student body that recently pitched a collective hissy fit over the administration refusing to issue guidance about their Halloween costumes and claimed the job of university staff was "not about creating an intellectual space" but creating safe spaces. And calls to trash the whole U.S. Constitution have become cool in certain lefty circles. Check out the Yale video below and judge for yourself how serious these students seem. (Then try not to weep.)  

Photo Credit: adapted from Kim Davies/Flickr

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    He talks to them about safe spaces. I have a feeling most were sincere signatures.

  • Quixote||

    All such acts must be taken at face value, and in fact they were indeed sincere, and rightfully so. This American "freedom of speech" nonsense has been invoked to try and justify using inappropriately deadpan "parody" as a technique to accuse well-connected and honored academics of things like plagiarism, which everyone knows they would never do. See the documentation of America's leading criminal "satire" case at:

    http://raphaelgolbtrial.wordpress.com/

    Yale students are certainly well aware of this ongoing, outrageous effort to resist the efforts of the prosecutors in New York, and of the (fortunately only potential) implications of that effort for unwanted trigger-speech and micro-aggression. They did well to sign the petition, and others should too.

  • Lee G||

    Can we consider attempts to get rid of the 1st Amendment violations of the NAP?

  • NoVAHockey||

    As long as you don't write about it, meet with like minded people about it, or try to influence policy in this area, you are free to do as you please. also don't pray about it.

  • Riven||

    Hey, man, sometimes it's a life or death situation

  • GILMORE™||

    Look, the other guy died of natural causes.

    Biting is perfectly natural.

  • ||

    I don't consider signing paper in passing a violation of the NAP, but it would be a good lead in to the interplay between A's 1 and 2.

    "Do you think 1A should be revoked?" and "Would it be OK to use force to do so?"

  • MJGreen - Docile Citizen||

    Isn't calling for any political action a violation of the NAP?

  • creech||

    Well, if you have to absolutely positively deport some people, then Yalies would be a good group to start with!

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Of course, we don't know how many students declined to sign. And we don't know that those who did actually took Horowitz seriously


    We also don't know how many of them were Bonesmen. What are you trying to hide, Elizabeth? Don't you know that jet fuel can't melt steel beams?

  • John||

    Remember, these are our future "top men" and the "best and the brightest".

    When you see things like this the fact that law, the media, government and finance are the only four fields were Ivy League graduates still dominate starts to make sense. Those are the four areas in this country where the institutions are most broken, superstitious, and filled with cronyism.

    I am coming to the conclusion that the higher ed bubble can't pop soon enough. Just exactly what good does a place like Yale do?

  • tarran||

    According to Bernie Sanders, it keeps those kids out of jail....

  • John||

    My God is that man stupid. Seriously, people make fun of Trump but Sanders is a thousand times more offensive and idiotic.

  • Thymirus||

    But his retarded political ideology cloaks him in a protective shroud. He's allowed to be a fucking idiot, and the media won't attempt criticism of his asinine bullshit.

  • Loki||

    It's offensive idiots all the way down.

  • AlexInCT||

    The alternative to Sanders is a criminal that believes she is owed the WH because of her plumbing. She is also just as bat shit crazy. But like Sanders she has the right letter next to her name, so they give these people a pass on the insane and stupid shit and focus on Trump to keep people distracted.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I am coming to the conclusion that the higher ed bubble can't pop soon enough. Just exactly what good does a place like Yale do?

    The bubble popped years ago. Every month you hear of a small, private liberal arts college shutting its doors. A research university with a large endowment like Yale can continue humming a long just fine. As I've said about Harvard before, if all their undergraduate students were suddenly abducted by aliens, the school would see be profitable just from its endowment and institutional-private sector and pubsec-institutional partnerships. You can't attack its endowment, but you could attack the latter.

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    I can't wait for President Bernie to tax the shit out of those endowments.

  • John||

    It would almost make a Sanders Presidency worth it. Sanders becoming President would be a disaster for the country but there would also be a good number of people who would find out what justice being served looks like.

  • John||

    You could totally attack its endowment. At some point the state of Massachusetts is going to go tits up and someone is going to notice that $28 billion or whatever it is Harvard endowment sitting there and wonder why it isn't being taxed. Places like Harvard are to us what the old monasteries were. When England and France each ran out of other people's money, where did they turn next? The monasteries. The same thing is going to happen here except with the universities.

  • sarcasmic||

    They'll go after retirement funds first.

  • John||

    Maybe but I doubt it. The owners of those funds vote in a lot bigger numbers than the supporters of Harvard. When the money really runs out and people get pissed off, they will go after places like Harvard first. When that money runs out, and it will, they will go after the retirement funds.

  • sarcasmic||

    Except that Harvard has a special connection to the ruling class that presumably knows what investments are safe, and which ones will be looted. By "looted" I mean "taken away from greedy capitalist profiteers and put into the loving hands of government bureaucrats."

  • In League with the Dark Ones||

    By "looted" I mean "taken away from greedy capitalist profiteers and put into the loving hands of government bureaucrats."

    If by "greedy capitalist profiteers" you mean ordinary middle class savers who aren't connected enough to know what investments are safe from government hands or don't know enough politicians to protect their money, then yes.

  • sarcasmic||

    If by "greedy capitalist profiteers" you mean ordinary middle class savers

    No. I mean the companies with which ordinary middle class savers do business with, and the companies that they invest in on behalf of their customers. They're investing in the wrong things for the wrong reasons. Government needs to step in and protect middle class savers from the capitalist profiteers.

  • Overt||

    I would tend to agree with this, except that when they raid our retirement accounts, it will be under the guise of helping us. "That last stock market crash wiped out so many peoples' retirements and now they are eating cat food. No one is going to take your savings, We merely need common sense regulations to ensure your money stays safe. As long as you invest in US Treasury bonds, you can keep your retirement account!"

  • Restoras||

    Sarcasmic and Overt are correct.

  • LarryA||

    "We're just moving your IRA out of that risky old stock market controlled by those greedy money managers to where the government can keep it safe. When you need it, your money will be right there in your Social Security account, along with your other voluntary contributions."

  • Rhywun||

    Jesus, I'll take up arms if this happens - and I've never owned a gun in my life.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    You could totally attack its endowment.

    I meant "you" as in "libertarians". I have no illusions that when push comes to shove, Harvard will go down harder than the Knights Templar.

  • Sevo||

    Interesting analogy; got some firewood handy?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    *Who

  • robc||

    When did you become prescriptive?

  • Rhywun||

    Language humor. I like it.

  • sarcasmic||

    Just exactly what good does a place like Yale do?

    It is a place for rich kids to network with other rich kids, and use those friendships for crony connections throughout their corrupt careers.

    Oh, you meant good? None at all.

  • mtrueman||

    "Just exactly what good does a place like Yale do?"

    It ensures free speech. Who needs a first amendment when you've got cronyism?

  • Sevo||

    That's pretty stupid even by your standards.

  • mtrueman||

    Thinking more will never hurt you, Sevo. A crony is someone who is above the law, someone for whom such things as first amendments are irrelevancies. Clear enough?

  • Sevo||

    mtrueman|12.17.15 @ 11:34AM|#
    "Thinking more will never hurt you, Sevo."

    Shitbag, nothing you ever posted is worth more than a second or two consideration before it's obvious it was posted by a pathetic attention-whore.
    Fuck off.

  • tarran||

    It's not stupid. It's a work of art.

    I think few people could craft a word salad with 13 words. You could even argue one word shouldn't count since it's an article. One could even argue that 'you've', being a contraction should count as two words.

    Let's not get bogged down, and say it's 13 ± 1 words, which is impressive by any measure.

    It's spare, yet it is clearly a word salad - seemingly full of meaning which when scrutinized falls apart into gibberish.

  • mtrueman||

    More thinking, less counting. It won't hurt.

  • tarran||

    That's great advice, mark!

    Should you ever say something worth thinking about, I'll definitely follow it.

  • mtrueman||

    "Should you ever say something worth thinking about, I'll definitely follow it."

    Far easier to count the words. But I appreciate your contribution, whatever form it takes.

  • Sevo||

    mtrueman|12.17.15 @ 12:26PM|#
    "Far easier to count the words. But I appreciate your contribution, whatever form it takes."

    We'll waitt for you to take off your shoes....
    Well, no we wont. Fuck off, shitbag.

  • mtrueman||

    "Well, no we wont."

    Pleeze yourself. Take note however, a crony doesn't need an amendment to ensure free speech. It comes with the territory of cronyism. Unfair, I know, but that's the way it is.

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    Ha, your question reminds of a scene from that preachy '80s movie Teachers. Nick Nolte (a social studies teacher) and the vice principal go out and get drunk. At one point Nolte talks about quitting teaching, and the vice principal drunkenly objects. He depicts the school system as the last bastion of civilization:

    "Without us...anarchy! And...a baby boom."
    "Baby boom?"
    "What do you think those little monsters would do if they weren't in school? Fucking!"
    "Fucking?"
    "Fucking! Like fucking little rabbits! We've got to stop that!"
    "You mean I'm a conraceptive (sic)?"
    "Yes, and one of the best."
    "Har har I'm a fucking rubber."

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    That's what Yale gets for deferring my admission. Too late, fuckers! I hate you now!

  • John||

    My wife works for a university that turned her down. She is one of those type A people who keeps every important record in her life. She still had their rejection letter when she got the job. She framed it and put it in her office.

  • tarran||

    That's pretty awesome.

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    Very awesome. I wish I kept records well enough to do that sort of thing.

  • waffles||

    Yeah, my paper record of achievements and failures only exists as long as my oldest gmail account. I'm not fastidious enough to hold decades-long grudges.

  • Princess Trigger||

    They thought he was talking about the Third amendment.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    I am all for free speech, but there should be limits.

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    But...

  • ||

    Again, there is a clearly defined limit to the 1st Amendment; it ends right before the 2nd Amendment.

  • Monty Crisco||

    HA~~! Consider this stolen, jackass!!

    MUHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA!

  • d3x / dt3||

    I thought it was went like;

    The Bill of Rights goes too far. They should have stopped with "Congress shall make no law"

  • Loki||

  • Libertarian||

    "...this is the same student body that recently pitched a collective hissy fit..."

    Well.....not exactly. Even your other linked article called them "activist students." Am I an unrepentant optimist for thinking that maybe the average Yale student is too busy studying to bother taking the time to counter-protest these PC idiots?

  • Loki||

    Am I an unrepentant optimist...

    Yes. There's no reason to be hopeful about the future. At all.

  • commodious spittoon||

    Bollocks. Just because actual liberals aren't as emphatic or shrill as these dweebs doesn't mean they get to exert their will unopposed.

  • MJGreen - Docile Citizen||

    Certainly some of those students were too busy partying with their offensive Halloween costumes to care.

    It would be nice to get the perspective of some students there. Are the activists a laughing stock to most students? When I was at NYU, there were a few high profile activist stunts, and everyone I knew laughed at the idiots involved.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    A point - I am VERY experienced in signature gathering. Those on here who know me know that I spent years active in the LP. I have personally gathered thousands (if not tens of thousands) of signatures. 50 in an hour is nigh impossible. Some caveats I am willing to give:
    1. It isn't a real petition with address, county, disclaimer, full initiative statement (granted I don't know this but why would they put the effort in to prove this silly point)
    2. He doesn't care about jurisdiction/ eligibility so he can ask everyone to sign.
    3. His time keeping device may not be ISO 3159-2009 compliant.

    STILL
    50 in an hour is a little over one a minute (1:12). I see only 1 clipboard. When I gather I have between 8-10 clipboards just for myself (people scribble slowly). And my absolute best when doing single location gathering is about 20 an hour.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I would argue that one should take Horowitz's claims addito salis grano in that, being a neo-con-ish version of John Stewart he explicitly prioritizes comedy in his work. Nevertheless, the video of him at Berkeley where he gets a metric ton more shit for waving the Israeli flag than the ISIS flag is brilliant.

  • commodious spittoon||

    addito salis grano

    And to think I called the signatories dweebs.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo.

  • Emmerson Biggins||

    I some how never found the verb irrumo in 3 years of highschool latin.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    It was there, in between criso and mentula.

  • waffles||

    We are so fucked. I mean it is Berkeley. But good goddamn these people don't think, they emote.

  • IceTrey||

    It's a little UNDER one a minute. One a minute would be 60 and he got 50.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    Phrased backwards...1.2 is over a minute for one sig. I need an edit button.

  • ||

    No hat tip?

    +2 image and alt-text, though.

  • Monty Crisco||

    Your hat tips.... are already dead.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    The millennial moment has arrived!

  • Loki||

    Nice alt-text. Maybe if we translated the constitution to emojis these shitstains might be able to understand it. Doubt it though. After all, "It's, like, 100 years old or something, and written in,like, olde english (and not Olde English malt liquor either), by old white men who owned slaves and stuff..."

  • GILMORE™||

    :/

  • Aloysious||

    Watch students at Yale...

    No. They make me retch just reading about their ignorance.

  • Thymirus||

    Simpleminded, unprincipled children who've known nothing but the comfort afforded to them by the exertions of better people -- moral people -- are prone to forgetting the facets of their societies that make such luxuries a reality for them and their self-entitled kin, unlike the rest of mankind, for whom liberty and prosperity remain distant hopes.

    Fuck these spoiled assholes, and fuck their cluelessness.

  • mtrueman||

    "Fuck these spoiled assholes, and fuck their cluelessness."

    Do they owe us a living?

  • Sevo||

    mtrueman|12.17.15 @ 11:41AM|#
    "Do they owe us a living?"

    Don't you ave someone in your life who will pay attention to you, rather than dirtying up the screen here, shitbag?

  • mtrueman||

    "Don't you ave someone in your life who will pay attention to you"

    Besides you?

  • Ken Shultz||

    "In under one hour on a main stretch of Yale's campus, video maker Ami Horowitz collected 50 signatures on a petition to say see-ya-later to that whole free speech thing Americans have been yammering on about for a few centuries."

    They're openly hostile to the freedom of religion, too.

    This is evidence of, no sarcasm, the libertarian moment. Libertarians should want elections decided over questions like free speech rather than gay marriage and freedom of religion rather than abortion.

    When we get all the people who genuinely care about freedom on one side and all those who are hostile to it on the other, we'll make a lot more headway than when both parties were merely giving our freedom lip service.

    Republicans:

    Pro free speech.
    Pro freedom of religion
    Pro Second Amendment
    Anti authoritarian and socialist solutions to climate change

    Democrats:
    Anti-free speech
    Anti-freedom of religion
    Anti Second Amendment
    Pro authoritarian and socialist solutions to climate change

    If the parties start splitting swing voters along those two sides, we will live in a significantly more libertarian country.

  • ||

    They're openly hostile to the freedom of religion, too.

    It's not a coincidence that ENB and larger portions of Reason at large 'overlooked' this detail.

    Libertarian moment!

  • Hugh Akston||

  • Ken Shultz||

    Different rights are more important to different people. I get that.

    And some people would rather stick up for the rights of dog fuckers than religious people, I get that, too.

    Can't say I'm really happy, myself, about sicking up for the free speech rights of neo-nazis or the Klan.

    But I can understand how some religious people might start feeling like we think of them as dog fucking neo-nazis just because they believe in Jesus, pray, go to church on Sunday, and frown on gay marriage and abortion, too.

    The libertarian moment happens when people who haven't made common cause with libertarians before start to do so. Libertarians are better than most people at separating standing up for people's rights and standing up for any particular person we don't like, so we shouldn't expect other people, who aren't on our side yet, to see past our attitudes towards them and embrace our cause--even if they don't like us personally. So maybe the libertarian moment doesn't happen until we stop treating everyday people, like religious people, for instance, as if they were a bunch of neo-nazi dog fuckers.

  • ||

    But I can understand how some religious people might start feeling like we think of them as dog fucking neo-nazis just because they believe in Jesus, pray, go to church on Sunday, and frown on gay marriage and abortion, too the Koran was revealed to Mohammed.
  • R C Dean||

    Of course, some of the Islamists actually are dog-fucking neo-Nazis. The hard part is sorting the dog fuckers from the decent people.

  • Ken Shultz||

    I'd say that as someone who came within a hair of converting to Islam myself, yeah, I stand up for the rights of Muslims, too, but I'd stand up for the rights of Muslims even if that had never happened.

    Honestly, I don't get why that matters.

    I'm talking about splitting swing voters. What are you talking about?

    Are you suggesting that we can't have a more libertarian world until redneck Republicans embrace Islam, or are you saying that religious rights are a bad thing because Islam?

  • Free Society||

    I'd say that as someone who came within a hair of converting to Islam myself

    What would your Moslem name have been?

  • Ken Shultz||

    Ken Shultz

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    With a nasab of ibn Muhammad, as all converts/"reverts" are required to take. A nisba of "Al Amriki" could have been adopted, as well as a kunya, depending on the community.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Yeah, well, obviously, it didn't get that far.

    And, also, obviously, if things don't confirm your preexisting biases, then they obviously can't be true.

    I can be as Muslim as a I want to be.

  • The Last American Hero||

    Ken: Look guys, we're pretty close here. Tell you what, 75 virgins and I'm all in.

    Mullah: *consults ancient texts* Sorry my friend, that is more than the promised amount. I can promise you no more than 72, and throw in a few Houri's for good behavior.

    Ken: Sorry, that was my final offer. I'm out.

  • Ken Shultz||

    We worked together for years.

    She was beautiful like a mountain meadow in bloom. She'd never have cheated on me, and she'd have taught our children to love and respect me as if it were by God's command. She was smart as could be, advanced degrees, certainly smarter than I am.

    If there's a better reason to convert, I can't imagine what it is.

    I didn't, but sometimes I wish I had.

  • Free Society||

    She was beautiful like a mountain meadow in bloom.

    So she was big, heavy and fertile. Got it.

  • commodious spittoon||

    If there's a better reason to convert, I can't imagine what it is.

    "That's just what we call pillow talk, baby."

    My cousin married a semi-practicing Muslim from Tunisia. He has a teenage sister back home whom he jokingly suggested marrying off to get her American citizenship. Hm...

  • grrizzly||

    My cousin married a semi-practicing Muslim from Tunisia. He has a teenage sister back home...

    Notice that it's very difficult to figure out whether He refers to the cousin or to the Muslim from Tunisia. In most European languages other than English, the genders of the cousin and the Muslim would have been clear right away.

  • commodious spittoon||

    Meine Cousine hat ein muslimischen Mann verheiratet.

  • grrizzly||

    Molto bene, grazie.

  • commodious spittoon||

    She was beautiful like a mountain meadow in bloom. She'd never have cheated on me, and she'd have taught our children to love and respect me as if it were by God's command.

    Tom Lochart was always my favorite character.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Tom Lochart was always my favorite character."

    Never heard of it.

  • commodious spittoon||

    I'm sure HM can tell you what a colonialism-romanticizing ahistorical wanker Clavell was, but I thoroughly enjoyed his books.

  • ||

    I'm talking about splitting swing voters. What are you talking about?

    The same thing. You're acting like folks here are just "hostile to religion." Plenty of people here who like religion are still dicks to religious people.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    Plenty of people here who like religion are still dicks to religious people.

    I wonder who you're talking about? ;-)

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    So maybe the libertarian moment doesn't happen until we stop treating everyday people, like religious people, for instance, as if they were a bunch of neo-nazi dog fuckers.

    Where does this come from? I have seen no evidence for it.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    The Sevo/FdA dogpile on Eddie, notwithstanding...but that's become more of a meme, really.

  • ||

    WAR ON XMAS

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • R C Dean||

    Where does this come from?

    Probably from the libertarian support for federally mandated licensing and recognition of gay marriage.

    There's something about government overriding religious objections to fundamentally changing civil society and institutions that makes religious people feel unappreciated.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Except that civil society hasn't been fundamentally changed, and all of the institutions that were there before gay marriage are still here.

  • R C Dean||

    To some religious people, the institution of marriage has been fundamentally changed. By state fiat. Over their objection. Making them feel unappreciated.

    Obviously, many libertarians don't think that changing the definition of marriage from "man and woman" to "any two people" was a fundamental change, or even a change at all, but we're talking about religious people who have a different view.

  • Hugh Akston||

    I'm sure homos felt pretty unappreciated for the centuries that they were denied legal protections that religious people take for granted.

  • The Last American Hero||

    Yes, but they hate Libertarians too, because, well, I don't know why.

    Love of the same gender has a strong correlation with love of big government.

  • Rhywun||

    Love of the same gender has a strong correlation with love of big government.

    Wut?

  • ||

    That's their fault for confusing THEIR institution of marriage with the parallel government institution of marriage. Once again, RC goes full intellectual dishonesty whenever his precious religious folks don't get what they want. Also, equal protection.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • Hugh Akston||

    Don't conflate Libertarian with libertarian.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    The sideways corollary was implied by the capitalization, you ninny.

  • commodious spittoon||

    Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships.

    But how can a couple feel like their relationship is legitimate without getting a permission slip stamped by a functionary?

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Where does this come from? I have seen no evidence for it."

    Read my comment within the context of my post.

    Neo-nazis and dog fuckers are examples of times when we stand up for people's rights--rather than the people themselves--because we find the people revolting.

    My point was that we should not treat religious people like neo-nazis and dog fuckers--in that one way. My point was not that religious people are just like neo-nazis and dog fuckers in every way.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Again, where are you getting that from? If you're going to paint with such a broad brush, then you have to show me where libertarians, as a whole, not just Reason or even individuals, fail to stand up for the rights of the religious.

  • Ken Shultz||

    It started with mad casual's response that "ENB and larger portions of Reason at large" overlook the detail that the people who want to get rid of the First Amendment are openly hostile to religious freedom, too.

    I presume you're not questioning that social justice warriors and progressives are hostile to the rights of religious people. I'm sure you know that they're on board with forcing fundamentalist bakers to bake cakes for gay weddings and forcing nuns to provide birth control to their employees, among other things.

    So I assume you're asking me about the evidence that religious people are treated around here as people whose rights we stand up for--despite the fact that we revile them personally? I think that there's ample evidence of that. I see it often. There is a strong contingent of people around here who think religious belief is stupid and should be treated with derision.

    To whatever extent they think religious people's rights should be respected despite how much they despise religious people, it's a testament to their sense of logic and their magnanimity.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    So maybe the libertarian moment doesn't happen until people realize there is a difference between not agreeing with people/ideologies and using the power of the state to force their ideologies on others.

  • Ken Shultz||

    I think those kinds of realizations might come as the political landscape changes and lines up in ways so that the political fault lines are set up in ways that are conducive to such realizations.

    And some of this stuff is knee-jerk instinctive. The First Amendment is already damn libertarian. For any swing voters out there who buy into the First Amendment as patriotism, even, it's an easy sell.

    The First Amendment (and other parts of the Constitution) are certainly the foundation of my patriotism. When I say this country is worth fighting for, the First Amendment is the kind of thing I'm talking about.

  • mtrueman||

    "When we get all the people who genuinely care about freedom on one side..."

    We'll get 2% of the vote instead of our usual 1%.

  • Ken Shultz||

    If you think only 2% of vote cares about our First Amendment rights, free speech and religious freedom, then you are wrong.

    Besides, I was talking about splitting up the swing vote, which makes up a lot more than 2% of the vote, and besides that, if 2% of the swing vote went one way or the other, that would have made a big difference in recent elections.

  • mtrueman||

    "that would have made a big difference in recent elections."

    It might have meant a different president from the one we were saddled with. Not all that big a difference.

  • The Last American Hero||

    2 percent cares about things like freedom of speech or religion on principle. 98 percent only care when it's their ox getting gored.

  • The Last American Hero||

    Or when the other TEAM is in office.

  • Sevo||

    Ken,
    You're dealing with a pathetic attention-whore who is here in the hopes someone makes the mistake of clicking on his handle and runs up his blog clicks.

  • LarryA||

    Republicans:

    Pro free speech except for sex stuff and anti-American stuff and gay stuff and atheist stuff and...
    Pro freedom of religion limited to Christians, which by the way don't include Mormons and a bunch of other fringe folks who call themselves Christians.
    Pro Second Amendment for U.S. citizens only.
    Anti authoritarian and socialist solutions to climate change but willing to use them to solve problems with businesses involving sex, alcohol, gambling (except government and church-run gambling) and a whole bunch of other sinful stuff.

    FTFY

  • Ken Shultz||

    I wasn't saying that the way things are.

    I was saying that's the way the winds are blowing.

    And if they calcify in those positions, then we'll see a more libertarian world.

    The future probably isn't about gay marriage and abortion, but that doesn't mean it can't be about the religious rights of individuals. The religious rights of individuals is a much bigger tent than gay marriage or abortion. Hell, lots of Christians disagree on the subject of gay marriage or abortions.

  • GILMORE™||

    yes, the anti-mormon pogroms are running rampant in Republican-run states, and deary me, aren't the NRA a bunch of hypocrites for not demanding guns for all the illegal immigrants? Touche, mon frere, touche.

    re: regulation of gambling, etc.... you really think that's a one-sided political issue? This list of states which ban fantasy-football seems a complete jumble of GOP and Dem-majority states. (add NY to that). Same with alcohol, or any other 'vice' issues.... which both parties are equally nannyish about.

    I think the reason climate change probably warrants a greater degree of significance than the chickenshit stuff you mention is the way it is being used to justify massive federal intervention that would affect all aspects of the economy. Sure, you can't buy liquor on sunday in X state because boo hoo Jesus. That's not quite a substantial riposte to the Dem's desperation to impose German-Energiewende-type rules on our entire energy-generation infrastructure.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "I think the reason climate change probably warrants a greater degree of significance than the chickenshit stuff you mention is the way it is being used to justify massive federal intervention that would affect all aspects of the economy."

    I don't see freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or the Second Amendment as chicken shit issues.

    Do you see abortion, gay marriage, and gun control as chicken shit issues? These are issues that make swing voters break one way or the other.

    I'm talking about Republicans scaling those issues up to get a bigger constituency. Instead of the GOP being about abortion and gay marriage, maybe they're about our First Amendment religious rights--as opposed to the progressives who are all but openly against them. That kind of thing.

  • GILMORE™||

    "I don't see freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or the Second Amendment as chicken shit issues."

    My comment was a reply to larry, not you. And the reference to "chickenshit" were the claims that "Christians oppress minority-christian sects", "immigrants can't have guns", and "GOP dislikes booze and gambling", etc.

  • LarryA||

    I didn't say the Democrats were any better. A plague on both their houses.

    BTW, the NRA and/or the SAF filed a lawsuit that overturned state laws keeping legal resident aliens from getting concealed carry licenses.

  • Calidissident||

    If recent polls in North Carolina and Iowa are any indication, a significant portion of the GOP thinks Islam should be illegal in the US. And I don't think you can say this has had no effect on policy, mosque construction regularly draws significant opposition from the right (with the "Ground Zero Mosque" being the most obvious example).

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    I emailed the "demands" of the Yale Med School students to a couple of Reason writers. Never heard back.

    It's still in draft form, but among the demands is "ending racial stereotypes in medicine". Specifically, they want the actors that are hired to play patients for the medical students to not have "stereotypical ailments".

    Got that? It's racist for doctors to be able to competently diagnose and treat diabetes, sickle cell, and heart disease.

    You can't make this shit up.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Yesterday we had a post about some feminists who, among their other suggestions, wanted campaign finance reform because political donors are disproportionately male.

  • Thymirus||

    Because, clearly, elevating the color of one's skin to a position of absolute supremacy as a consideration in every conversation, action, or endeavor will effectively combat racism.

    Leftists are fucking retarded.

  • sloopyinTEXAS||

    but among the demands is "ending racial stereotypes in medicine".

    So no more sickle cell anemia? Sweet!

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    "ending racial stereotypes in medicine"

    So, they're going to put quotas on the number of Indians and East Asians graduating from their school?

  • Auric Demonocles||

    My ulcerative colitis is gone? Hooray!

  • Citizen X||

    Wow, it's nice to know that i won't be getting severely sunburned anymore. Thanks, Yale Med School students!

  • lap83||

    So acknowledging risk factors is racist.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Mother Nature is a reactionary.

  • Bean Counter||

    After they sign, arrest them for creating an unsafe space for speech.

  • Loki||

    I'm sure Yale will graciously allow a "free speech zone" in some far off out of the corner of the campus.

  • Loki||

    *...out of the way corner...*

  • LarryA||

    It would be much simpler to tell them to shut up.

    "But I have the right to say-"

    Nope. You just signed it away.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    You know, these assholes really and truly do deserve President Trump. I might be truly overcome with schadenfreude to watch them have to live under a system where the unbridled authority that they were happy to unleash gets administered by their worst enemies.

    The only problem is that the rest of us get stuck in that situation too.

  • R C Dean||

    Considering we are stuck in the system where Our Masters unbridled authority to do what they want, regardless of who Our Master actually is at any given point in time, you might as well bust out the popcorn in case Our Master actually takes it to your enemies for a change.

  • Loki||

    That's the problem with democracy: we get the government other people deserve.

  • Drake||

    That's how it went down for the Athenians. Strange they don't teach their blunders and disasters in school any longer.

  • Free Society||

    Strange they don't teach their blunders and disasters in school any longer.

    Sure they do. Every lesson they teach is filled to the brim with sophistry.

  • Restoras||

    Strange they don't teach their blunders and disasters in school any longer.

    Maybe it isn't so strange.

  • Doctor Whom||

    But they still won't get it. When I point out examples in which such a thing has actually happened, I get either responses of the "You just have to elect the right people" variety or goalpost-shifting.

  • Free Society||

    NEWS FLASH: Yale students have taken to snapping their fingers instead of clapping their hands as a form of applause, due to their overwhelming douchebaggery.

  • LarryA||

    Back to the hippie '60s.

  • cgr2727||

    Ok, let's grant her premise, then send the jackboots in to crack her skull for circulating a petition.

  • Seamus||

    Of course, we don't know how many students declined to sign.

    If Horowitz didn't give us that number (I didn't watch to the end, so I don't know whether he did), then we can be pretty sure it was significantly higher than the number of those who signed.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Does ENB remember the Senate Democrats voted as a caucus to repeal the free speech clause of the Constitution last year? Being anti-1st Amendment is a mainstream left wing position now.

  • ||

    I was thinking it might be an awesome idea to hold onto the petition in case any of these kids ended up in public-facing careers, that the signatures could be pretty embarrassing in a variety of situations, but realized what you were saying; that there are just as many places where there calls for repeal would be rewarded.

  • AlmightyJB||

    No Presidents from 3rd rate colleges.

    http://humanevents.com/2015/12.....-drop-out/

  • GroundTruth||

    How 'bout we start with the Yale campus as the place to enforce the laws that could become constitutional if there were no first amendment?

  • Careless||

    "I think the Constitution should be one big safe space"

    love it

  • RobfromCali||

    You should be able to speak for yourself and opt out of the First Amendment. In that spirit, I would tear up their application to remove the First Amendment and stop listening to anything else these students have to say.

  • MJGreen - Docile Citizen||

    Mmm, that Jacobin piece is delicious.

  • ||

    And horror inducing. I hope those people never obtain any power.

  • Old.Mexican||

    Yale Students Totally Cool With Repealing the First Amendment


    That's because they're so smart. All Marxian college kids are smarter than any of us combined. Tony the Marxian told me so, then it must be true.

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    LOL, and yet somehow we manage to totally oppress them!

  • Vernon Depner||

    He's aiming too low. If it were put to an up or down vote in the US today, the whole Bill of Rights would be voted down.

  • beaker55||

    Will someone please tell me... at what level is the U.S. Constitution taught? It once was required knowledge for graduating from the 8th grade. My guess is that is probably relegated to an obscure elective course at some universities. If I was a despot and wanted to have control of the masses, I'd deprive them of any real Knowledge and Understanding, then award them a vellum document with a genuinely embossed gold seal and a few official looking signatures which they could frame and proudly hang in their cubicles. I'd also have them Mesmerized by a HD TV several hours each day. Piece of CAKE!

  • beaker55||

    Pathetic idiots.

  • Fredrick Douglas||

    Come on, not one person said, Get da fuck owta heya!"? How many responded in the negative to this? Seriously...I need to know.

  • beaker55||

    But that misses the point of the blog, i.e.: We've got a healthy number of terminally ignorant zombies filling the hallowed halls of our institutions of higher learning (...and they're the one's who end up running the country). “One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” – Plato

  • Grumpy Old Timer||

    So they signed a petition to repeal their right to petition the government? Glad I am retired and nearing the end of my road. I do not want to live in a world run by these.... Sorry, I couldn't think of a proper term for them.

  • Rockabilly||

    Junior members of the anti-sex league.

  • retiredfire||

    Doesn't a lot of the opprobrium, expressed here, work under the assumption that these "Yalies" even know what the First Amendment says?
    To many of them, I'll wager, it is something the demoncraps in the US Senate have been working on changing, because stuff like "Citizens United" and "campaign finance laws" have been in the news.

  • Alan@.4||

    Supposedly Christ offered, just before his crusifiction:Forgive them lord, they know not what they do.

  • jcvcam@verizon.net||

    Trigger alerts, safe space, micro aggression, all of it is nonsense. Repeal the First Amendment? WTF! The best way to deal with it is to ridicule it. After all political correctness is a doctrine that holds you can pick up a turd by its clean end.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online