He's far too nice to the school, refusing to "damage the brand" by naming them. Poor little snowflakes need to feel a little heat.

This is a college class, right? I'm not very familiar with law schools so I don't know what "grade 12" is in this context.

But it puts me in mine of what David Horowitz once told me about the 1960s Left: "We only wanted our rights so we could use them to take away everyone else's rights." The Left has never been committed to free speech for anyone other than themselves. Any statements to the contrary were just recruiting slogans.

And while I'm on it: "There's often a difference between people's private morality and the law." That's not a controversial statement with me. Law is not morality. It cannot be a substitute for morality. Law is a minimum set of standards to prevent social disorder. That's it. My personal sense of morality is sometimes quite different from the law. I still respect the law because, well, if you want a civilized society, you have to. But that doesn't mean I agree with it. And all the lawmaking in the world cannot compel me to change my opinion.

And finally: "In any case, he had no right to an opinion on the subject of abortion because he was a man." Sorry, cupcake. We aren't chasing lions on the savanna; we live in a modern pluralistic society. Everyone gets to have an opinion about how that society is conducted, and you do not get to reject someone else's opinion solely because they are not of your tribe.

When feminist bigots (excuse the redundancy) tell me I don't have the right to an opinion on abortion I tell them yes I do because I'm a former fetus.

Reason number 529......why Trump won the election.

We can only hope the SJW crusade will be driven back under the rock they crawled out from under.

Punch back twice as hard.

Canada is doomed, but maybe we can save ourselves.

Sadly, though the Free Speech Movement came out of the left, it's now the Free Speech Squashing movement that does.

Let me point out that, generally speaking, they're the same people. 45 years ago, they weren't in a position of power. Now they are.

I agree with the general thrust of this thread, but I would point something out.

"We've normalized pathology and pathologized normal conversation..."

I would say that we have normalized feigning pathology. It doesn't matter whether a person is truly troubled to the point of being unable to function in the face of someone else's opinion or conduct; they merely have to profess they are.

The student who reported the professor obviously feels that as a man, he has no right to an opinion on the subject of abortion. I doubt she found it impossible to function in the face of his opinion on the subject. She was sufficiently functional to find her way to the administrator's office.

I don't believe for a minute that his opinion traumatized her, but she knew she had to claim she was in order to get him fired.

She isn't some sheltered fragile femme who needs holistic healing and wellness. She's a vindictive cunt who needed to punish someone for disagreeing with her.

It's getting ridiculous.

"he had no right to an opinion on the subject of abortion because he was a man"

The school needs to retroactively fail that student for not understanding that two eggs doth not a baby make.

If we can contribute to the baby-making process we get to have an opinion on the outcome.

What Isab said: "Reason number 529......why Trump won the election. We can only hope the SJW crusade will be driven back under the rock they crawled out from under."

I actually believe this is happening. This is what the alt-right is all about: Stop apologizing for your beliefs, stop aping political correctness. There's actually shit-all the SJWs can actually do, and it's funny to watch their brains short-circuit.

The pendulum has reached it's SJW extreme and is beginning to swing back. At work this week, I protested that a survey of our programmers had questioned 2/3 women, when only 15% of the programmers are actually women. The people who ran the study apologized, imagine. Just a couple of years ago, I'm not sure I would have dared make that criticism.

I am going to enjoy the next few years.

That said, it will suck when the pendulum swings past the middle and things get extreme again, in some other, stupid direction.

Cousin Dave, my understanding is that it's basically a high school, law school prep course similar to this one:

http://victoriaparkci.ca/departments/canadian-and-world-studies/cln-4u1-introduction-to-canadian-law-grade-12/

I accuse all SJW's of using military language and spreading the implication that they are themselves weapons.

"Trigger" is mostly a military term and spreads a feeling of violence which offends me. To be "triggered" implies that they are bundles of tension waiting to explode or react, beyond their conscious ability to control their response.

I call on them to use a language of peace, not war, and of calm reaction rather than presenting themselves as bombs or coiled springs waiting to snap.

Personally, I'm pro-choice, though I find abortion creepy and troubling, especially if it isn't done just a few weeks into a pregnancy.
__________________________________

Call it a hunch, but I suspect that at least half of anti-choicers would be happy to ignore any first-month abortions IF those abortions did not require a doctor's help in any way.

Why do I say that? Because I don't remember hearing anything about attempts to ban abortifacient herbs from being sold in, say, natural health stores. So if there HAVE been such bans, there likely haven't been very many.

Not that those herbs can always be counted on, of course. Also, while tea brewed from certain herbs are generally safe, taking oils internally can be deadly.

I have the feeling that this is not the whole story. So far we only have the teacher's description of events. (I wonder if the high school girl in question had just had an abortion? or knew someone who had, due to rape or incest?)

And while men have a right to an opinion on abortion, their opinion should not count.

"And while men have a right to an opinion on abortion, their opinion should not count."

LOL! That's so funny.

Oh, I forget it's a CHOICE. Not a life.

Ah. That's so special.

I have the feeling that this is not the whole story. So far we only have the teacher's description of events. (I wonder if the high school girl in question had just had an abortion? or knew someone who had, due to rape or incest?)

And while men have a right to an opinion on abortion, their opinion should not count.

Fran in LA at December 8, 2016 4:12 PM

Not count with whom, and for what?

Fran, we frankly don't give a damn what the female special snowflake's perspective was.

Isnt this just another version of cultural/ sexual appropriation?

Men did not arrive on this planet through parthenogenesis.

They all had mothers, grandmothers, sisters, girlfriends, wives and daughters. Their opinion counts.

if this dipshit cant handle a simple,discussion,she should retreat into a safe space like a mental institution.

"And while men have a right to an opinion on abortion, their opinion should not count."

Fran in LA,

Fuck off. When you get there, fuck off again. Then come back ... and fuck off.

Bint.

I am pro-life, but I would be thrilled, thrilled, thrilled if abortions were limited to the first two months of a pregnancy.

So, anyway, why is one woman's opinion more important than this woman's opinion? Isn't she dissing my feelings?

Every unborn child comes from both a man and a woman.

We are talking human beings here - and every human's opinion is worthwhile and should be counted.

Oh, yes - here's a fun case you all may have heard of by now:

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=sofia+vergara+embryos

One article is titled:

"'Modern Family' star Sofia Vergara sued by her own frozen embryos."

No joke.

In a nutshell, she's refusing to let the frozen embryos get used, even in a surrogate, and her ex, Nick Loeb, isn't happy about that.

From the BBC:

...The IVF process initially produced several embryos, prompting the following text message exchange, according to the plaintiff's documents.

Mr Loeb: "Now what. You can't keep 4 frozen lives forever or kill them, we will go to hell."

Ms Vergara: "We r going to hell regardless".

Just saw that lenona on another news site.

"Very interesting"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krD4hdGvGHM

Does anyone else think this grew out of the nonsmoking movement? In the early days, people who didn't like smoking were able to have some small personal power by claiming they were "allergic" to cigarette smoke. Often, these were exsmokers who somehow managed to survive smoking for years without a permanently embedded epipen. From there it was just a short hop to controlling behavior for just about anything a person found offensive, with fragile psyches given as much credibility as anaphylactic shock.

"And while men have a right to an opinion on abortion, their opinion should not count."

This one's... missing.

Scenario 1: Fran doesn't want a baby, sired by a longtime companion.

Scenario 2: longtime companion finds history of birth defects in her family and tests show abnormal development, but Fran wants the child.

If I understand Fran correctly, she gets to abort the first case for personal convenience and keep the second, because only her opinion counts.

Good luck figuring out why men won't commit, or simply flee.

I don't believe this girl was traumatized at all. We've had plenty of experience with the SJW personality type at this point, which might best be described as a power-mad toddler in an adult body. They've learned after years of perfecting the tantrum at the daycare, that the best means of gaining control is to claim the status of "victim" (they aren't really) and then use a feigned injury to bully mercilessly to get their way - ie someone destroyed they don't like. Administrators, teachers, and civil servants fall for this game endlessly (see Sadiq Khan for the latest). Until we realize we are dealing with malignant narcisstics here, and likely a new variant of the Cluster B personality disorder, we can't adequately deal with this threat to society and open discussion.

Administrators, teachers, and civil servants fall for this game endlessly

Incorrect. You are 100% wrong to paint the admins etc. as victims. They are full participants in the game. They do not punish anybody they don't want to punish.

Agreed Dee. The administrators and civil servants are in on it. The teachers used to be but now they are under the gun with the rest of us. And suddenly they see the problems with this system. Doesn't say much about the education establishment's morals when they only realize the problem after they start being abused instead of abusers.

Nicole, it's not getting ridiculous.It's been ridiculous. None of this is new. But the apologists, victim blamers and rationalizers can't dismiss it so easily anymore.

“What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.”

― William Lamb Melbourne

This damn fool retires in six years. And has no sympathy for those who, years ago, apologized, explained away, rationalized and blamed the victim back when this shit could have been nipped in the bud. They were cowards on one side of the aisle,and opportunists on the other. The cowards are ready to fight now. Its never difficult to be a sunshine soldier. And the opportunists? Well, Mary Wallstonecraft Shelley was trying to tell us something...

I had started a response to Fran in LA that included certain choice four-letter words for her suggestion that a man's opinions shouldn't count, but decided not to post it because I anticipated being condemned for being too harsh.

Nice to see I wasn't the only one who had some choice words for her.

And while men have a right to an opinion on abortion, their opinion should not count.

And while women have a right to an opinion on men refusing to support them and their children, their opinion should not count.

The funny thing is, can you tell if Fran is a troll or not? I mean Gog regularly make inflammatory and crazy comments just to provoke a reaction. But Fran's comment is a well publicized feminist viewpoint. It is quite mainstream. It probably isn't possible to tell if the comment was honest or purely to incite.