Hacker News Reader

Comment by hotpotamus | Hacker News Reader

If you really want to scramble your noodle, look at the recent spate of state laws placing restrictions on speech and notice the lean of the parties that control those states.

View on HN

Can you give some examples? Is it actually speech that's being restricted, or actions, or access to certain types of speech/content (e.g. age restrictions)?

Well, for awhile there was lots of talk about CRT. https://www.texastribune.org/2021/12/02/texas-critical-race-...

Well, it's already a well-established principle that, when you take taxpayer money from the government, the government gets to attach conditions to it as they see fit. That's not a violation of any individual rights.

I'd say that's a well-unestablished principle now.

https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/06/court-strikes-down-maines...

Regardless of your stance on this topic, this is a bad example. Regulating what teachers are allowed to tell students in the course of their employment as teachers is not a freedom of speech issue, any more than the owner of a fast food restaurant requiring their employees to upsell is a freedom of speech issue.

Yes, there are higher ideals in play in the first case, but that does not make it a freedom of speech issue, legally or even ethically. Employers can regulate what you say while working for them on their time, and that holds whether the employer is private or public.

Similarly biology teachers aren't allowed to teach intelligent design unless it is a part of the curriculum, you can't just teach whatever theory you want without the school boards permission.

I don't think that biology teachers should teach intelligent design, and I don't think that is a free speech violation.

So what would you do if you found out your child's biology teacher was speaking to them about intelligent design?

They would get fired with cause since they aren't doing their job properly.

Exactly why I think this sort of fundamentalist belief in free speech is silly.

https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/lawmakers-push-to-b...

Don’t forget the 1619 Project.

The 1619 project has been widely lambasted as unhistorical political educating.

https://www.city-journal.org/1619-project-conspiracy-theory

This appears to be a single article with 0 sources, not evidence that it has been widely lambasted.

It's been talked about repeatedly in places like The Atlantic, that it's ideology masquerading as "history".

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/12/historians...

https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2019/11/19/american-slavery-an...

Ok. So it’s ok to restrict it?

On the contrary, we should all forget the "1619 Project".

I suspect that’s the point of restricting speech about it.

conflates the topic of free speech, with state-funded education that teaches people they are automatically oppressed (privilege theory), and teaching to a captive audience (students).

It’s probably easier to assume it’s the restrictions on speech that you agree with. I usually prefer the easy way myself.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com