Peaceful protest is the right of all to express opinions publicly, but the people stalking events for various presidential candidates are not peaceful protesters. Most presidential candidates, even Democrats, have been confronted by individuals seeking to stifle voices, not to expand debate. The disrupters are violating the rights of others, but what’s worse is that authorities we pay to maintain order aren’t doing their jobs, especially at universities.
For instance, in Portland, a group estimated at approximately 100 crashed the organizational meeting students at Portland State University were holding to organize for GOP frontrunner Donald Trump.
Presumably Portland State gets federal funding. Yet claims were made that campus security didn’t assist in maintaining order.
The disrupters—speech cops basically—allegedly “gloated” over shutting the meeting down and threatened to return if the students trying to organize exercise their First Amendment rights.
How exactly does this happen in the US?
Bill Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Ted Cruz—all have faced so called ‘protesters’ attempting to disrupt legal events.
It’s one thing to peacefully express discontent regardless of where your politics lie. It’s another to suppress the rights of those who disagree with you.
Who pays these disrupters?
Media call these people “social justice warriors.” That is farcical. These individuals are totalitarians, bent on forcing their views onto society and prohibiting those who disagree from expressing theirs. SJW is just a politically correct term to describe people who want to take away rights from others. There is nothing ‘just’ about SJW.
At a New York event, one man claimed climate change kills immigrants in poor communities. If it’s so bad here, why would you leave your home country? The man was hostile to Texas senator Ted Cruz, but these disrupters haven’t just focused on Republicans.
Why are security officers, whether on a college campus or in a public venue, accommodating people who violate the rights of others to free expression?
(Commentary by Kay B. Day/April 8, 2016)