Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Good for them, but they cannot trump students' Constitutional rights. What about the very frequent subjectively and objectively offensive and verbally abusive protests at UC Berkeley do you not understand?
Good for them, but they cannot trump students' Constitutional rights. What about the very frequent subjectively and objectively offensive and verbally abusive protests at UC Berkeley do you not understand?
Fine, but that's for a court to decide at this point and not you.
You're citing "frequent protests". Is there a specific incident similar to this incident? Are they apples to kumquats? Are you going to bring every incident that ever occurred at every public university for all history to try and make your point?
This one is a) not a protest and b) unique in that the song referenced by name the fraternity that operates at the pleasure of the university. That is the case we are discussing. The students do not have a blanket right to verbally abuse other students - the determination of whether it is or is not abuse made by the administrators - and whether the punishment stands or is in violation of the constitution is up to a court of law, and not you.
What part about they already DID expel them don't YOU understand? If UC Berkeley decided not to take action for whatever protests you're talking about, for whatever reason, disclosed or otherwise, then there's no action to debate.
Please show me where the OSU administrators need to check with UC Berkeley before making their determination.
Fine, but that's for a court to decide at this point and not you.
Courts have already decided.
Quote:
"...under a speech code in effect at the University of Michigan for 18 months, white students in 20 cases charged black students with offensive speech. One of the cases resulted in the punishment of a black student for using the term "white trash" in conversation with a white student. The code was struck down as unconstitutional in 1989 and, to date, the ACLU has brought successful legal challenges against speech codes at the Universities of Connecticut, Michigan and Wisconsin."
Take your own advice. and ANYONE who works in government and says those things would be fired.
You obviously know nothing about Civil Service rules and the very rigid guidelines on progressive discipline.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feltdesigner
these kids signed a code of conduct with the university...
those kids are free to sing those songs all they want now that they are expelled... they are protected However, as soon as they find another school and sign a new code of conduct they will have to act accordingly or risk being expelled again if they do something similar.
They didn't sign a code of conduct that suspended their basic civil rights and it wouldn't be valid if they were compelled to sign it. In that same code of conduct to which you are referring the university describes the discipline process and the university violated their own process and procedures.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsterRufus
Stick to your own program. I did not speak to the incident regarding the physical attack you brought into the discussion, so how could you have "understood me correctly" regarding which is worse. They're both bad, the physical attack is worse. If you're going to make stuff up then this pointless. All lynching is bad. What's your point? They obviously weren't referencing whites being lynched, given that they used the words "them" and "n*****r" in the same sentence. I'm 50. What does the timeline have to do with anything? There are 2 generations of people older than me with persons alive today who lived through that era.
Are you telling me if my second grader brought a project to school that consisted of "I hate n*****s and they should all be banned from my school, I'm not going to play with them and they should all be hung from a tree" that there would be no consequence? The government cannot prosecute someone for exercising their right to free speech. But should their free speech create an environment which intimidates and excludes the other students who also have a right to attend, and disrupts the educational environment, then there are repercussions. And rightfully so. In fact I'm pretty sure that would be covered under the pretty strict bullying policy. Free speech certainly doesn't trump a child's right to not be bullied. Continued VERBAL bullying is grounds for expulsion. How is that, if free speech trumps all?
What different dynamic would that be? An employment contact perhaps? That restricts their right to say whatever they like in public about their employer? Maybe something similar to a code of conduct?
Can military personnel go around saying whatever they like in public without repercussion? What would happen if they called their Superior Officer a slur? You reckon that would be a ok with their employer, aka the government?
I don't think my scenario is anymore outlandish than a bunch of university sanctioned fraternity brothers and sorority sisters singing about lynching and gleefully stating "There will never be a n*****r SAE". That's pretty outlandish IMHO.
So much off kilter. No, you didn't bring up the previous incident and are very unwilling to discuss it because it is such an egregious example of hypocrisy that it shows why this university president is in trouble over his disparate punishments.
The example of kids doing what you describe at an elementary schools is very different on many levels. One, it is a directly confrontational action. What the students did at OU was in a private setting. The second difference is that the students at OU did not have a persistent pattern of behavior and it wasn't directed at anyone. The third difference is that the courts have treated K-12 schools very differently from colleges and universities. If you like, I can cite the cases, but only if you'll read them.
As to the lynching, it is you who referenced it as a current threat, not a past one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsterRufus
I didn't say they were employees now, did I? They were members of a fraternity and students of the university, the university has authority over students, just like bosses have authority over employees. It's you who stated the government cannot punish someone for their speech under any circumstances ever.
Here's the section of the Student Code of Conduct that would be relevant:
18. Harassment, Threats, and Bullying: Subjectively and objectively offensive verbal abuse, threats, intimidation, harassment, coercion, bullying or other conduct that threatens or endangers the mental or physical health/safety of any person or causes reasonable apprehension of such harm that is persistent, severe, or pervasive.
There are consequences for your words. Whether this particular instance constitutes verbal abuse is indeed debatable, however what's NOT debatable is that you can indeed be sanctioned for what you say, depending on what it is. So please don't pretend that all speech is constitutionally protected. Obviously if you agree to a code of conduct that includes the prohibition of verbal abuse then it is not.
I hope they take it to court, I'd like to see them attempt to defend themselves. Should be interesting. A decent person would realize they effed up and take responsibility for their actions.
So I am not sure why you are quoting Oklahoma STATE University's Code of Conduct when this happened at The University of Oklahoma, but be that as it may did you actually read it? Since the words were not said directly to anyone they don't fit and even if they had been directly said, it was a one time occurrence, not persistent or pervasive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsterRufus
A university has rules. It's not a free for all. Should they be ruled unconstitutional in their action then so be it. I am happy they challenged this crap. If you think the school is being hypocritical, you certainly have a right to your opinion. Should they have acted differently in other cases? Sure, probably. Have they overstepped in this case? Could be. You may well be right about that.
The fact remains, whether I'm right or not, whether the university is right or not - they did indeed take action. Otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation. So it's up to the court to decide whether they had grounds. Obviously they think they did, so you jumping up and down saying they can't ad infinitum has no merit at this point, because they JUST DID.
So, let's see what the court has to say about it. I'm happy for them to challenge the university. Let's hear it.
So it is great that they took an action, any action, right or wrong, allowable or not, at least they took action?
This gets sillier and sillier.
They violated all of their stated policy and procedures and gave the students no due process rights, which is another violation of constitutional rights.
The incredible irony is that if the president had done nothing more than condemn the acts and say he was working with the fraternity national office it would have been resolved and it wouldn't have been a national story and no ongoing controversy.
A public university CANNOT override students' First Amendment right to Free Speech. It's as simple as that. There wouldn't be so many protests of various sorts, many of which are subjectively and objectively offensive and verbally abusive, at UC Berkeley if they could. End of discussion.
Well the beginning of the discussion would be for you to educate yourself.
Universities - public or not, have standards. Same with employment - public or not.
We all get handbooks when we start our job. Colleges have similar rules of conduct.
Well the beginning of the discussion would be for you to educate yourself.
Universities - public or not, have standards.
Look, the ACLU has taken several public universities to court over this exact same type of issue and WON, as I've already posted. Public universities CANNOT trample students' First Amendment rights. Period.
Quote:
After you learn the basics, take a logic class.
I know the basics. And there's nothing wrong with my logic. You need to educate yourself. You're COMPLETELY wrong on this. Go read the ACLU link I posted.
As abhorent as the frat boys' song was, OU simply cannot violate their students' First Amendment right to Free Spech. Period.
From your link:
Quote:
Universities are obligated to create an environment that fosters tolerance and mutual respect among members of the campus community, an environment in which all students can exercise their right to participate fully in campus life without being discriminated against. Campus administrators on the highest level should, therefore,
speak out loudly and clearly against expressions of racist, sexist, homophobic and other bias, and react promptly and firmly to acts of discriminatory harassment;
And:
Quote:
Q: Does the ACLU make a distinction between speech and conduct?
A: Yes. The ACLU believes that hate speech stops being just speech and becomes conduct when it targets a particular individual, and when it forms a pattern of behavior that interferes with a student's ability to exercise his or her right to participate fully in the life of the university.
The ACLU isn't opposed to regulations that penalize acts of violence, harassment or intimidation, and invasions of privacy. On the contrary, we believe that kind of conduct should be punished. Furthermore, the ACLU recognizes that the mere presence of speech as one element in an act of violence, harassment, intimidation or privacy invasion doesn't immunize that act from punishment. For example, threatening, bias-inspired phone calls to a student's dorm room, or white students shouting racist epithets at a woman of color as they follow her across campus -- these are clearly punishable acts.
Despite your bellowing to the contrary - there ARE punishable acts connected to speech.
Universities are obligated to create an environment that fosters tolerance and mutual respect among members of the campus community, an environment in which all students can exercise their right to participate fully in campus life without being discriminated against. Campus administrators on the highest level should, therefore,
speak out loudly and clearly against expressions of racist, sexist, homophobic and other bias, and react promptly and firmly to acts of discriminatory harassment;
You are completely wrong. All a public university is permitted to do Constitutionally in response is what I've bolded above: react promptly and firmly by speaking out loudly and clearly against expressions of racist, sexist, homophobic and other bias. The ACLU took Michigan to court over a racist Free Speech issue, and WON.
Quote:
Quote:
Q: Does the ACLU make a distinction between speech and conduct?
A: Yes. The ACLU believes that hate speech stops being just speech and becomes conduct when it targets a particular individual, and when it forms a pattern of behavior that interferes with a student's ability to exercise his or her right to participate fully in the life of the university.
The ACLU isn't opposed to regulations that penalize acts of violence, harassment or intimidation, and invasions of privacy. On the contrary, we believe that kind of conduct should be punished. Furthermore, the ACLU recognizes that the mere presence of speech as one element in an act of violence, harassment, intimidation or privacy invasion doesn't immunize that act from punishment. For example, threatening, bias-inspired phone calls to a student's dorm room, or white students shouting racist epithets at a woman of color as they follow her across campus -- these are clearly punishable acts.
Despite your bellowing to the contrary - there ARE punishable acts connected to speech.
There were no acts of violence, harassment, or intimidation in this case. There was just racist speech, which is protected as Samir Shabazz very well knows. PLUS, no particular individual was targeted.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
