@StevePeers @buj08 I agree, but her right to free speech isn't absolute. She is speaking at the discretion of the organisers and unless the law says otherwise, they shouldn't lose that discretion after an invitation.
@StevePeers @buj08 The 1986 protection is clearly about ensuring that someone who turns up to speak can speak, if they stripped the speaker status after someone arrived they might be in trouble (30 minutes is really not a good notice time)
@StevePeers @buj08 The 2018 university guidance does acknowledge that freedom of protest s free speech, and says it should not shut down debate, but the information suggests this wasn’t about the debate but the person.
@StevePeers @buj08 Not that I fully agree. Deborah Lipstadt wouldn’t debate Holocaust deniers because she said as soon as she agreed to debate, she would be saying it was debatable. There are reasons to argue for no debate.
@StevePeers @buj08 But I don’t dispute the issue, you could be right, there could be a legal problem, but I don’t think anything was intended to give people absolute right to free speech or end the discretion of a platform owner.
@StevePeers @buj08 A legal framework that says if you give someone an opportunity to speak you can’t change your mind because it then becomes a protected right is archaic and it undermines the free speech of anyone who objects.
@StevePeers @buj08 And Amber isn’t making a legal argument, she is tying it to free speech which is a nice way to tie it to the idea “snowflake students” have been shouting down debate and don’t want to listen to alternative ideas.
@StevePeers @buj08 At its heart, the freedom of expression rights aren’t supposed to turn an invite to speak into an extension of your right to speak against the future wishes of an event host.
@StevePeers @buj08 She can hide behind legislation if she wants, but she doesn’t look like she was deplatformed because of her opinions but objections over endorsing someone associated with Windrush.
@StevePeers @buj08 People objected to her talking because she did the wrong thing in office and “inviting her to debate that” doesn’t work when it was the wrong thing, she said it was the wrong thing, and she resigned because it was the wrong thing.
There is no debate to be had...
There is no debate to be had...
