February 17, 2017 by David K. Sutton
Cartoon: Baby Donald’s White House
RATIONAL RESISTANCE
CLICK FOR THE LATEST
BLOG POSTS
FROM FOLLY WHACK
- Constitutional Originalism's Conceited Intent
- Can We Blame The Internet For Political Polarization?
- Cartoon: Baby Donald's Budget Priorities
- Russian Election-Hacking Bingo, Conspiracies For Liberals
- Paul Ryan's Priority. Hint: It's Not Affordable Health Care
- Don't Force 'Sanctuary Cities' To Do Fed's Job
- With 'Fatal Conceit,' Speaker Paul Ryan Fails Insurance 101
- Republicans Cannot 'Solve' Health Care In Good Faith
- Wiretapping Trump's Reality Detachment, One Tweet At A Time
- ACLU: Transgender 101: A Glossary Of Terms
- Does The President Have To Be Sworn In With A Bible?
- Shifting The Burden Of Proof, And Unfalsifiable Claims
- Reverse Racism Is Not A Thing
- Paradox Of Tolerance: Can You Be Intolerant Of Intolerance?
- 8 Human Follies Of The Religious God-Fearing Variety
I don't think this represents everyone on the Left, but the Left does have a problem here. What do you think?
Opinion | The left’s misguided obsession with ‘cultural appropriation’
washingtonpost.com
Our culture is enriched by the melding of different artistic traditions.
"There is, they reckon, about a 10 percent chance of a temperature increase exceeding 6 degrees Celsius, or 11 degrees Fahrenheit. That would be a civilizational catastrophe, orders of magnitude more dangerous than the likely warming scenarios, and potentially on a scale that could threaten human life. Even if the likely scenarios were completely harmless, the far-right tail alone is horrific enough to justify significant steps. After all, they argue, people do not accept a 10 percent likelihood of a fatal car crash or terrorist attack."
What If Climate Scientists Are Guessing Wrong?
nymag.com
The New York Times’ new conservative columnist does not understand that the risk of errors runs both ways.
"He urged readers inclined to defend liberal norms on matters of speech to adopt “a more sophisticated understanding” and argued that “the parameters of public speech must be continually redrawn to accommodate those who previously had no standing.”
Were there “parameters of speech” at Berkeley 10 or 15 years ago that denied standing to students who have it today? What were the parameters? Who are the students?"
This College Administrator Thinks Free Speech Is Dangerous. Here's Why He's Wrong.
theatlantic.com
New York University Vice Provost Ulrich Baer’s op-ed in The New York Times is the latest challenge to unfettered debate that fails to withstand close scrutiny.