February 11, 2009

Quick erratum re: the SMU debacle

In my previous post, I referred to two posts from Blevkog in which I referred to that blog as one of the "apologists for the pro-abortion shouters."

To this, author Flash replied:

I actually didn’t ‘play down’ anything - I was unaware that the talk was moved off-campus. Thank you for the clarification.

You will have noted that I in fact disagreed strongly with the way the protesters’ message was delivered - I recommended a calm, rational discussion, as anyone who chooses to click the link will discover.

I do agree with the message, and strongly disagree with the topic being presented. I make no secret of that, but I did not endorse or act as an ‘apologist’ for anyone. Quite the opposite, in fact. If you have followed my posts over a period of time, I have consistently been opposed to displays of this sort. In fact, my position on free speech is quite the same as yours, which you may have noticed.

I would therefore appreciate if you would characterize my post more accurately.

Thanks for stopping by, anyway.

So, mea culpa. In fact I had not read Blevkog previously; these two posts simply came up in a Google blog search. Reading two posts in isolation may give me a very different impression than if I had read the same blog extensively, and so if Flash says he largely agrees with my point of view, I stand corrected.

I did note that Flash disagreed with the method of the protesters' delivery, so let me clear up any misunderstanding that I disagreed with him in that respect: I was simply not commenting on those parts.

Anyway, there being 1440 suckers born daily, there's no shortage of nitwits willing to argue that censorship via shouting down, cancelling, and pushing speakers off campus constitutes "free speech."