
# 113, OTOH, Glen & April Red/Blue conversation on free speech, Part 1, May 7 2025
Failed to add items
Add to Cart failed.
Add to Wish List failed.
Remove from wishlist failed.
Adding to library failed
Follow podcast failed
Unfollow podcast failed
-
Narrated by:
-
By:
About this listen
In this first of a four-part “Red/Blue” discussion, Glen and April engage in a free-wheeling conversation on the topic of freedom of speech. They delve into issues surrounding free speech in the United States, with April speaking from a primarily conservative view and Glen from a generally liberal perspective. Among key points of discussion, April emphasizes free speech as a fundamental constitutional right safeguarding individuals from government interference, particularly when expressing unpopular or traditional views. She introduces the concept of “virtuous free speech,” striking a balance between the right to speak and the responsibility to speak well. Glen concurs with many of April’s points, highlighting that free speech rights are primarily protected against government intrusion, not in the private sector. He underscores that while free speech is a legal right, responsible use of it is a voluntary moral decision. Glen provides examples of controversial protected speech, such as flag burning and Westboro Baptist Church protests, to illustrate the importance of protecting even objectionable speech to prevent government overreach. Both speakers acknowledge the need to strike a balance between free speech rights and other competing principles and interests.
The discussion then shifts to the complexities of free speech in higher education, particularly on public university campuses. April and Glen explore the role of government in regulating speech and the challenges of balancing free expression with the need for a safe learning environment. April describes her interest in the Heterodox Academy, an organization that advocates for viewpoint diversity and open inquiry in universities. Part 1 concludes by highlighting the ongoing debate about the limits of free speech and the potential for self-censorship among students.