Alpha Sigma Sigma or (ASS) should be the name of this bunch of frat racist nuts.

Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15595
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Alpha Sigma Sigma or (ASS) should be the name of this bunch of frat racist nuts.

Ok, no that is not the name of the frat, but should be the name of this frat. To the credit of the National Chapter, this OK college sect was bitch slapped. If there is an Alpha Sigma Sigma frat, I was making a play on the word ASS, no reflection on anyone but these dickheads. http://abcnews.go.com/US/video-purported...d=29490305

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4888
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline

EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
No Free speech in USA.

Many of the protesters in Fuergeson were college students. Some were part of orgainizations at black colleges. Some of these protesterts shouted death threats against white police officers.

Is anyone going after them? If a video of black fraternty, shouting kill the police surfaced, would the same standard apply? Don't think so.

Face it. We don't have free speech anymore. Just polictial correctness.

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4196
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
of course we have free

of course we have free speech. don't be fucking ridiculous. is anyone going to arrest these kids? is the state penalizing them in any way? now if the university wants to penalize them, that's their right as a private institution, isn't it? or would you rather the government stepped in and told the school they couldn't do that? unlike most of europe, the US has virtually no restrictions on hate speech. you have the right to be a cunt and others have the right to call you out for being a cunt. that's all that's happening here.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:of course we

iwbiek wrote:
of course we have free speech. don't be fucking ridiculous. is anyone going to arrest these kids? is the state penalizing them in any way? now if the university wants to penalize them, that's their right as a private institution, isn't it? or would you rather the government stepped in and told the school they couldn't do that? unlike most of europe, the US has virtually no restrictions on hate speech. you have the right to be a cunt and others have the right to call you out for being a cunt. that's all that's happening here.

OU is a public university. In fact even the 'private' institutions nearly all get government funding. The government uses money this to enforce politically correct speech only at universities. They are banished from public university kicked out of their home, that is their punishment.

It is really disturbing what the OU president said:

"To those who have misused their free speech in such a reprehensible way, I have a message for you. You are disgraceful. You have violated all that we stand for."

So if you "misuse" free speech you need to be punished????

Isn't this pure McCarthyism? Punishing the entire fraternity for the actions of 2 people? No due process for anyone?

So basically if you hold contriversial views, you can't attend public university, but you must still pay taxes to support these universities?

Then where is the press going after the Ferguson protesters to have them tossed out of their college for chanting that they wanted to kill white cops? Or was there hate speech justified?

So what is going to happen in the USA now is nearly everyone is dependant on the government in some way. So the government takes away your benefits if you say something they don't like. This is supposed to be free speech for everyone?

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4196
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
how do you know there was no

how do you know there was no due process? i'm sure there are plenty of rules about behavior in both the university and greek council handbooks. it doesn't seem like anyone is appealing the decision yet. the message is, if you want to sing racist songs in front of a video camera, don't go to OU. again, nobody is being arrested. the constitution guarantees freedom of speech without government reprisal. it doesn't say you can be a dick with impunity and not suffer any consequences at all, be they academic or professional. just because an institution receives government funding does not put it under government control. now, if you want to argue that tertiary schools should get no government funding, fine. that's a separate issue. but until one of these kids faces arrest or prosecution for this video, don't bring the constitution into it. it's like when christians face disagreement and call it persecution. honestly, if you can't stand political correctness, you probably just shouldn't go to college, as most colleges are well known hotbeds of liberal ideas. it's not like you can't live well without a college degree. or you could go someplace like bob jones, where these boys would probably just be in trouble for drinking.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:how do you know

iwbiek wrote:
how do you know there was no due process? i'm sure there are plenty of rules about behavior in both the university and greek council handbooks. it doesn't seem like anyone is appealing the decision yet. the message is, if you want to sing racist songs in front of a video camera, don't go to OU. again, nobody is being arrested. the constitution guarantees freedom of speech without government reprisal. it doesn't say you can be a dick with impunity and not suffer any consequences at all, be they academic or professional. just because an institution receives government funding does not put it under government control. now, if you want to argue that tertiary schools should get no government funding, fine. that's a separate issue. but until one of these kids faces arrest or prosecution for this video, don't bring the constitution into it. it's like when christians face disagreement and call it persecution. honestly, if you can't stand political correctness, you probably just shouldn't go to college, as most colleges are well known hotbeds of liberal ideas. it's not like you can't live well without a college degree. or you could go someplace like bob jones, where these boys would probably just be in trouble for drinking.

Money puts OU under government control. If OU didn't act quickly, their funding dries up.

When do the wheels of justice ever move this quickly? They had zero opportunity to get a lawyer or make any kind of a defense against the charges.

So your position is free speech is only available if you don't want to ever receive government benefits? So the goverment could make one pay in Social Security tax  their whole working life, then deny  benefits when you are 65 because of your exersize of free speech? Are these expelled students now exept from paying taxes to support public universities? Don't think so. So they are punished for free speech.

Here is article from UCLA(one of those hotbeds)  law professor.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/03/10/no-a-public-university-may-not-expel-students-for-racist-speech...

What will probably happen is they'll sue OU and as always taxpayers are on the hook to pay for it all.

If you want there to be universities that are nothing but hotbeds for liberal ideas only, fine.  Just don't put a gun to my head and ask me to pay for it.

 

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15595
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Many of the

EXC wrote:

Many of the protesters in Fuergeson were college students. Some were part of orgainizations at black colleges. Some of these protesterts shouted death threats against white police officers.

Is anyone going after them? If a video of black fraternty, shouting kill the police surfaced, would the same standard apply? Don't think so.

Face it. We don't have free speech anymore. Just polictial correctness.

 

What the fuck? Yea, that is why South Park has been on TV for how many years? A show that has poked fun dipicting Mary bleeding out of her ass, has a black character called Token, has Cartman saying "FUCKING JEW" almost every other episode. And has dipicted atheists shitting out of their mouths and had Dawkins fucking a tranny.

 

These frat guys were being assholes and got their asses handed to them. Free speech is in no danger. And what really pisses me off is people post crap like this on an atheist website. How long has this website existed? If there were no free speech, considering we are a minority even with liberal theists, this website would have  been shut down a long time ago as much as atheists offend religion. 

Some bigots had their asses handed to them. Nothing more.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Some bigots

Brian37 wrote:

Some bigots had their asses handed to them. Nothing more.

The government just punished someone for free speech and you applauded.

You know the same thing is soon going to happen to anyone that insults Islam at a university.

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15595
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Brian37 wrote:Some

EXC wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Some bigots had their asses handed to them. Nothing more.

The government just punished someone for free speech and you applauded.

You know the same thing is soon going to happen to anyone that insults Islam at a university.

 

What? Yea that is why Columbia University had ImadumassJerk  former PM of Iran give a speech. It is also why Muslims were successful in preventing  Ayaan Hersi Ali from speaking at Harvard. 

Westboro  Bapfuck Church is in no danger of spreading its crap. Pat Robertson is still spewing his bullshit. Offensive speech is still protected. 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4196
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Just don't put a

EXC wrote:
Just don't put a gun to my head and ask me to pay for it.



you know, if you're so fucking principled about the whole thing, why not just refuse to pay your taxes, tell the IRS to go fuck themselves, make as much noise about it as you can, make a high-profile case out of the whole thing, and go to prison, where you can turn our reams of written material, give interviews, and make a rather comfortable platform for yourself? i guarantee you'd do more to further your cause that way than bitching on RRS. you and brian are two sides of the same broken record.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4196
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Money puts OU

EXC wrote:
Money puts OU under government control. If OU didn't act quickly, their funding dries up.



pure speculation.


EXC wrote:
When do the wheels of justice ever move this quickly?



in university disciplinary committees. i remember when a girl at my alma mater got caught plagiarizing. it took about five days for her to get kicked out of school, and there were no news cameras then. why should lawyers be present? the student's civil rights aren't being threatened--no one is guaranteed a university education, and certainly not at a particular school--and the school's rules don't contradict any laws.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4888
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Money puts OU

EXC wrote:

Money puts OU under government control. If OU didn't act quickly, their funding dries up.

When do the wheels of justice ever move this quickly? They had zero opportunity to get a lawyer or make any kind of a defense against the charges.

I disagree. OU is not under government control. I think you are confusing 'influence' with 'legislation'.

There were no wheels of justice. Their own board made a decision which was due to the problems they had in the past and they want to clean up their public image.

There is no lawyer involved. They have no rights. The charter for that frat can dry up quicker than a fart in the wind and the case will never be heard in a court of law because there are no state, county or city laws protecting those students from the wrath of the University or their fraternity HQ.


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3945
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Ah, I have to agree with

Ah, I have to agree with that article's assessment of the first amendment. It's a public university. 

As for what I think about it.....this is a tough subject for me. Perhaps I am too much of a sentimentalist...or maybe that's not quite it either. 

My love of freedom of expression says it wouldn't be right if all of these students were expelled over this event, but I also acknowledge that there can never be "complete" freedom of speech, as Volokh himself elaborated on a little:

Quote:
3. To be sure, in specific situations, such speech might fall within a First Amendment exception. One example is if it is likely to be perceived as a “true threat” of violence (e.g., saying “apostates from Islam will be killed”...

I may comment more in a bit.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote: you know, if

iwbiek wrote:

you know, if you're so fucking principled about the whole thing, why not just refuse to pay your taxes, tell the IRS to go fuck themselves, make as much noise about it as you can, make a high-profile case out of the whole thing, and go to prison, where you can turn our reams of written material, give interviews, and make a rather comfortable platform for yourself? i guarantee you'd do more to further your cause that way than bitching on RRS. you and brian are two sides of the same broken record.

How does one refuse? They  just take what they want.

The media wouldn't cover it  accurately anyways. I'm not a maryter for any cause. I don't believe I get some eternal heaven for putting myself in prision.

You of all people. You know the same thing happend with Joe McCarthy that is happening to the rest of the fraternity. Guilt by association.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:It is also why

Brian37 wrote:
It is also why Muslims were successful in preventing  Ayaan Hersi Ali from speaking at Harvard.

Thanks to people like you that only stand up for free speech when you agree with the speech.

If the speech had been anti-Islamic instead of racist, you'd be all against what the university did to protect its government funding.

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4196
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:iwbiek wrote: you

EXC wrote:

iwbiek wrote:

you know, if you're so fucking principled about the whole thing, why not just refuse to pay your taxes, tell the IRS to go fuck themselves, make as much noise about it as you can, make a high-profile case out of the whole thing, and go to prison, where you can turn our reams of written material, give interviews, and make a rather comfortable platform for yourself? i guarantee you'd do more to further your cause that way than bitching on RRS. you and brian are two sides of the same broken record.

How does one refuse? They  just take what they want.

The media wouldn't cover it  accurately anyways. I'm not a maryter for any cause. I don't believe I get some eternal heaven for putting myself in prision.

You of all people. You know the same thing happend with Joe McCarthy that is happening to the rest of the fraternity. Guilt by association.




the victims of mccarthyism were in real legal danger, particularly from perjury. besides that, their livelihoods were significantly threatened directly by an organ of government. this is not happening here. christ, just because you're on the net doesn't mean you have to be alarmist as fuck...

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3945
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:There

digitalbeachbum wrote:
There is no lawyer involved. They have no rights. The charter for that frat can dry up quicker than a fart in the wind and the case will never be heard in a court of law because there are no state, county or city laws protecting those students from the wrath of the University or their fraternity HQ.

I agree that their chapter can easily be torn apart by the national fraternity. However, I don't think the university can legally expel the individual students because of this speech (I'm sure the main culprits will no longer be at this university regardless, for multiple reasons, so ultimately, it doesn't matter for this specific case), unless they could pull some sort of justification out of this part:

Quote:
You can hang him from a tree

But he’ll never sign with me

If it's successfully argued that this is a genuine implication of violence or perhaps even an attempt to incite violence, that would probably fall under first amendment exceptions. 

Other than that, there does appear to be more than sufficient precedence for a public university to be bound by the first amendment. 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote: the victims of

iwbiek wrote:

the victims of mccarthyism were in real legal danger, particularly from perjury. besides that, their livelihoods were significantly threatened directly by an organ of government. this is not happening here. christ, just because you're on the net doesn't mean you have to be alarmist as fuck...

How is kicking someone out of their home and their school not affect their livelyhood? At least the Hollywood studios didn't take money from the government so they could hire and fire as they please. This is government using its teets to control speech.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:If it's

butterbattle wrote:

If it's successfully argued that this is a genuine implication of violence or perhaps even an attempt to incite violence, that would probably fall under first amendment exceptions. 

Other than that, there does appear to be more than sufficient precedence for a public university to be bound by the first amendment. 

So you also want any Furguson protester that was shouting violent threats against police thrown out of their college and any organization they were a part of closed down by their university? What is the difference?

What other government benefits can the speakers of hate speech have denied?.

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4888
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:So you also want

EXC wrote:

So you also want any Furguson protester that was shouting violent threats against police thrown out of their college and any organization they were a part of closed down by their university? What is the difference?

Did any Furguson protesters get thrown in to jail for their speech? No.

I would assume that every single person who got arrested during those riots got arrested for throwing rocks, starting fires and robbing stores.

 


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4196
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:How is kicking

EXC wrote:
How is kicking someone out of their home and their school not affect their livelyhood?



oh please, undergrads have nothing approaching a livelihood, nor do they see their school as their "home." most will run chastened back to mom and dad and re-enroll somewhere else by fall semester. and if their situation really is so dire that they don't have that option, then they should have familiarized themselves with the student and greek codes of conduct and comported themselves accordingly.


EXC wrote:
This is government using its teets to control speech.



again, pure speculation. you have no proof of this. show me a letter or quote me an official who said that if OU doesn't expel these students, their funding will suffer. i won't hold my breath...

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote: oh please,

iwbiek wrote:

oh please, undergrads have nothing approaching a livelihood, nor do they see their school as their "home." most will run chastened back to mom and dad and re-enroll somewhere else by fall semester. and if their situation really is so dire that they don't have that option, then they should have familiarized themselves with the student and greek codes of conduct and comported themselves accordingly.

Probably some or many are like this. There are a lot of spoiled frat boys. But, I actually statyed in one for a semester when I was struggling college student and they had an open room I could stay in for cheap, I didn't join and had no idea if anyone was racist. I would have had to drop out for a semester had I been kicked out without any hearing(I didn't have money for a hotel). Total guilt by association.

Why no hearing with first amendment lawyers?


iwbiek wrote:

again, pure speculation. you have no proof of this. show me a letter or quote me an official who said that if OU doesn't expel these students, their funding will suffer. i won't hold my breath...

I have to prove the obvious. Everything a university president does comes down to money, educations is way down the list of priorities. Do you know how the world works at all?

Administrators are told to get out in front of a scandal before it causes too much damage. That is why they were expelled immediatley. Before the boycotts could begin.

They had one football recruit that decided not to go to OU. You should know at a school like OU allumni donations are tied to how well the football team does:

http://www.businessinsider.com/jean-delance-decommits-from-oklahoma-2015-3

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/07/03/report-finds-alumni-giving-among-other-areas-correlated-football-success

So it all came down to money of course.

Honestly, do you not think that Al Sharpton would be calling for a boycott of OU until the fraternity was closed?

But at a public univesity you are guaranteed free speech:

http://time.com/3739268/sigma-alpha-epsilon-university-of-oklahoma-expel-free-speech/

 

Don't you and Brian think that if OU gets away with this, universities will then think they can ban anti-religious speech and atheist groups?

http://www.dailytargum.com/article/2015/01/hate-speech-will-not-be-tolerated-on-campus

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4196
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
i really don't give a shit

i really don't give a shit what american universities do. as far as i'm concerned, they can ban whatever they want, including atheist organizations, as nobody has to be there. if the students have a problem with it, let them step up and put pressure on the administration. no need to for the goverment to step in. i'm also against it when the government forces businesses to cater to races or religions or sexual orientations they don't agree with. if you want to lobby for public funding of universities to end, fine, but don't start with this freedom of speech bullshit. you have zero proof the government is curtailing anybody's freedom of speech in this situation, so the first amendment does not apply.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3945
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote: If it's

butterbattle wrote:

If it's successfully argued that this is a genuine implication of violence or perhaps even an attempt to incite violence, that would probably fall under first amendment exceptions. 

Other than that, there does appear to be more than sufficient precedence for a public university to be bound by the first amendment. 

Eh, for this post, I was only discussing what has been established by law and court precedence, not how I personally want this issue to be resolved. I'll elaborate a little further on both.

For the former (what the university can legally do), I agree that a public university cannot expel students for offensive speech. If the expelled students sued the university now, from the tiny amount of knowledge I possess of everything and anything to do with laws and legal proceedings, a court ruling in favor of the university would not be following the most objective interpretation of the law and would be overturning the precedence set by previous cases concerning free speech on public university campuses. Having turned it over in my head a couple more times, I also agree with the UCLA professor in your article that their racist chant can't be reasonably interpreted as a "true threat." 

EXC wrote:
So you also want any Furguson protester that was shouting violent threats against police thrown out of their college and any organization they were a part of closed down by their university? 

For the law to be consistent, I suppose universities would be permitted to expel the protestors whenever they made a "true threat" against the police, as in a "credible" threat, as in a threat which could reasonably be interpreted to implicate actually causing bodily harm. Of course, that definition seems ambiguous as shit. I don't know how that's handled in the court system...

As for what I personally want, again, I'm honestly conflicted in several ways on this subject.

- I suppose the university should be able to expel the protestors that actually committed crimes.

- I'm not sure how far they should pursue punishing protestors that only made violent threats...

- I don't think they should shut down any organization they were a part of, unless those organizations are promoting committing crimes or exists for the purpose of committing crimes.

- In the fraternity case, I don't think the university should expel all the students in that fraternity, as I haven't seen sufficient evidence that the fraternity, as a whole, supports the message in the video. I might be in favor of punishing a couple "main perpetrators," but even on that statement, I don't feel very confident.  

EXC wrote:
What is the difference?

What other government benefits can the speakers of hate speech have denied?.

Hmmm, I don't think we are disagreeing, at least in principle. 

I don't think there is a difference. We have to evaluate people based on their behavior, NOT on the content of their speech, and certainly, NOT based on how offended we get.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote: as nobody has

iwbiek wrote:
as nobody has to be there.

Which totally contradicts your lefitst and Marxist bretheren. who tell us wages are driven down to starvation level. So we must all fully fund college education.

According to PC left, many people have to be in public university(or face starvation wages). But now, they will have to keep their mouths shut about anything that might slow down the flow of money to the school administrators(like anti-Islamic speech).

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4196
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:iwbiek wrote: as

EXC wrote:

iwbiek wrote:
as nobody has to be there.

Which totally contradicts your lefitst and Marxist bretheren. who tell us wages are driven down to starvation level. So we must all fully fund college education.

According to PC left, many people have to be in public university(or face starvation wages). But now, they will have to keep their mouths shut about anything that might slow down the flow of money to the school administrators(like anti-Islamic speech).

 




again, you're just like brian, deflecting to something else when your bullshit has been thoroughly called. in this case, you can't demonstrate conclusively that someone's constitutional rights have been violated at OU, so instead you try to seize on something ancillary to the main argument and make it about marxism. sort of like brian attacking my avatar when he has nothing else to say. the two of you talk way more about marxism than i ever have. you're both embarrassments.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3945
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote: if you want to

iwbiek wrote:
if you want to lobby for public funding of universities to end, fine, but don't start with this freedom of speech bullshit. you have zero proof the government is curtailing anybody's freedom of speech in this situation, so the first amendment does not apply.

Muh, am I reading this wrong? This is completely different than how I understand the first amendment...

As I understand it, an American public high school teacher is not allowed to tell his history class to convert to Catholicism, then send every Protestant to after-school detention in room 203B when they don't convert. It doesn't matter, as an exercise in determining if the first amendment is relevant, if Congress does not pass a bill requiring Protestants to go to detention and/or if the Secretary of Education does not send the teacher an email about spreading worship of the virgin mary. This individual teacher could have decided to do this all on his own, but it would still be a first amendment issue simply because he is a public high school teacher; as a public high school teacher, he is treated as a representative of the government with respect to the first amendment. 

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4196
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:iwbiek

butterbattle wrote:

iwbiek wrote:
if you want to lobby for public funding of universities to end, fine, but don't start with this freedom of speech bullshit. you have zero proof the government is curtailing anybody's freedom of speech in this situation, so the first amendment does not apply.

Muh, am I reading this wrong? This is completely different than how I understand the first amendment...

As I understand it, an American public high school teacher is not allowed to tell his history class to convert to Catholicism, then send every Protestant to after-school detention in room 203B when they don't convert. It doesn't matter, as an exercise in determining if the first amendment is relevant, if Congress does not pass a bill requiring Protestants to go to detention and/or if the Secretary of Education does not send the teacher an email about spreading worship of the virgin mary. This individual teacher could have decided to do this all on his own, but it would still be a first amendment issue simply because he is a public high school teacher; as a public high school teacher, he is treated as a representative of the government with respect to the first amendment. 

 




yes, but a public high school is not the same thing as a public or state university. high school teachers are hired by the state, so they literally are government workers. university professors, to my knowledge, are not. also, public high schools are compulsory (at least up to a certain age), and universities are not. honestly, the only thing that makes a state university "state" is that it receives much more government funding than a private university (and even they receive some state funding). they are not an organ of the state, therefore they're not bound to guarantee first amendment rights in the course of their business.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote: again, you're

iwbiek wrote:

again, you're just like brian, deflecting to something else when your bullshit has been thoroughly called. in this case, you can't demonstrate conclusively that someone's constitutional rights have been violated at OU, so instead you try to seize on something ancillary to the main argument and make it about marxism. sort of like brian attacking my avatar when he has nothing else to say. the two of you talk way more about marxism than i ever have. you're both embarrassments.

No. You got called on your BS.

They were denied a public benefit for saying something contreversial. They were denied due process. Others were punished only for having an association. I don't know how more unconstitution it gets.

So you're right all, these civil libertarian law professors are wrong.

http://time.com/3739268/sigma-alpha-epsilon-university-of-oklahoma-expel-free-speech/

http://totalfratmove.com/ucla-law-professor-claims-university-of-oklahoma-had-no-constitutional-authority-to-expel-racist-chanters...

They're all B.S.? So why are we funding public education if so many law professors don't understand the constitusition as well as you? We'd be better off closing down all the law schools and just have them read your blog.

So you disagree with the leftists that tell us we must fund public universities because many people have no other option? Or they don't have to be there, so they can leave if they don't like the rules on speech? Which is it?

 

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4196
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:So why are we

EXC wrote:
So why are we funding public education if so many law professors don't understand the constitusition as well as you?



beats me.


EXC wrote:
We'd be better off closing down all the law schools and just have them read your blog.



in this case, so it would seem. the first amendment bars the government from making any laws abridging freedom of speech, etc. and the govenment hasn't done anything of the sort in this situation. the first amendment clearly doesn't limit universities' rights to discipline as they see fit. sorry.


EXC wrote:
So you disagree with the leftists that tell us we must fund public universities because many people have no other option?



yes, i do. there are millions of people in the US with no tertiary education who live above the poverty line. it's common knowledge.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:[ in this case,

iwbiek wrote:
[


in this case, so it would seem. the first amendment bars the government from making any laws abridging freedom of speech, etc. and the govenment hasn't done anything of the sort in this situation. the first amendment clearly doesn't limit universities' rights to discipline as they see fit. sorry.


They are denied a public benefit based soley on their speech. How is that not an abridgement? If they commited a crime of a threat of violence, they are supposed to have a right to trial. So to you, anyone that has spoken against the government may be denied retirement benefits?

So the governmet can control free speech via clever tricks, they just can't be overt about it. They can grant money to whatever university they please and if they don't like the speech of any student, they just pull the funding. They don't like political speech so they get pull a church's tax exemption for speech that is political.

iwbiek wrote:
[
yes, i do. there are millions of people in the US with no tertiary education who live above the poverty line. it's common knowledge.

So if you lived in the US, you'd be happy to pay taxes for law professors that don't know shit, and an education system that is almost useless and waisteful?  If you ever complained you'd be bitchy like me.

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3945
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote: yes, but a

iwbiek wrote:

yes, but a public high school is not the same thing as a public or state university. high school teachers are hired by the state, so they literally are government workers. university professors, to my knowledge, are not. also, public high schools are compulsory (at least up to a certain age), and universities are not. honestly, the only thing that makes a state university "state" is that it receives much more government funding than a private university (and even they receive some state funding). they are not an organ of the state, therefore they're not bound to guarantee first amendment rights in the course of their business.

Ah, that's where you're coming from. Okay, hmmm, I'll have to look up that one a little more. 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:iwbiek

butterbattle wrote:

iwbiek wrote:

yes, but a public high school is not the same thing as a public or state university. high school teachers are hired by the state, so they literally are government workers. university professors, to my knowledge, are not. also, public high schools are compulsory (at least up to a certain age), and universities are not. honestly, the only thing that makes a state university "state" is that it receives much more government funding than a private university (and even they receive some state funding). they are not an organ of the state, therefore they're not bound to guarantee first amendment rights in the course of their business.

Ah, that's where you're coming from. Okay, hmmm, I'll have to look up that one a little more. 

Iwbiek is dead wrong on this. The OU president was selected by the board of regents. The OU board of regents is appointed by the governor and approved by the state senate. State governments are subject to the US constitution.

http://www.ou.edu/regents/

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4196
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
no one has the legal right

EXC wrote:
The OU board of regents is appointed by the governor and approved by the state senate.



mm-hm. out of curiosity, what is the salary, drawn from the taxpayers' money, of a member of the board of regents?


EXC wrote:
State governments are subject to the US constitution.



yes, and the first amendment begins "congress shall make no law." the first amendment is about protecting our freedoms from legislation. congress did not legislate to abridge these poor boys' freedom of speech, nor did the oklahoma state legislature. i don't care who appoints whom, no legislation was made, no one is being prosecuted, and universities, regardless of whether they are state or private, are independent of both state and federal governments. it's as clear as is the summer's sun: this is not a first amendment case. i don't care what some junkyard dog lawyer the frat or the parents hired says: it's obvious. it's over before it starts. lawyers will pull out any kind of bullshit if they smell money. apparently, so will you, if you think you smell a commie or whatever.


EXC wrote:
They are denied a public benefit based soley on their speech.



no one has the legal right to a tertiary education, therefore to call it a "public benefit" is spurious. and your analogy with "retirement benefits" (i'm assuming you mean social security) is just silly. the government has direct control over social security. it has no control whatsoever over universities.


EXC wrote:
So if you lived in the US, you'd be happy to pay taxes for law professors that don't know shit, and an education system that is almost useless and waisteful?



again, whether or not you agree with taxes going to support universities is a totally separate issue and i will not be taken down a non sequitur because you suddenly realize you have neither a logical nor a legal leg to stand on regarding the OU issue. period. i win, you lose.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4196
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote: They can grant

EXC wrote:
They can grant money to whatever university they please and if they don't like the speech of any student, they just pull the funding.



pure, sophomoric speculation.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5408
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 I  am traveling so don't

 I  am traveling so don't have access to all my bookmarks, but the Supreme Court has ruled in at least half a dozen cases that the First Amendment does apply to any public university, and typically, the court has applied a stricter standard to universities than they have to other government entities. If the expelled students pursue legal action, it is a slam dunk case in their favor. They may even be eligible for punitive damages per a case from the late 80's but I would have to reread that one to be confident about that. I will provide links to specific cases when I get home, I know I have a folder full on this specific topic. So Butter is right regarding the law, I'd have to say that EXC is wrong about his generalization because there is a long history of the Supreme Court slapping down language related rules, so while some University students may have their free speech infringed, the government in the end has repeatedly overruled University policies and likely will in this case if it goes to court. Our current Court is particularly biased towards erring on the side of protecting free speech.

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: I  am

Beyond Saving wrote:

 I  am traveling so don't have access to all my bookmarks, but the Supreme Court has ruled in at least half a dozen cases that the First Amendment does apply to any public university, and typically, the court has applied a stricter standard to universities than they have to other government entities. If the expelled students pursue legal action, it is a slam dunk case in their favor. They may even be eligible for punitive damages per a case from the late 80's but I would have to reread that one to be confident about that. I will provide links to specific cases when I get home, I know I have a folder full on this specific topic. So Butter is right regarding the law, I'd have to say that EXC is wrong about his generalization because there is a long history of the Supreme Court slapping down language related rules, so while some University students may have their free speech infringed, the government in the end has repeatedly overruled University policies and likely will in this case if it goes to court. Our current Court is particularly biased towards erring on the side of protecting free speech.

The people that I think have commited a crime are the ones that recorded and distributed the speech. The courts have ruled that' 'fighting words' are not protected speech.

If we insult  Islam on this website, it is protected(for now) because we are not being in your face and trying to provoke a Muslim into responding. But if we stand outside a Mosque and do it, then it's 'fighting words'. So if someone took our insults of Mohammad put them on a poster for people to see, are we provoking a fight or are the people showing the poster?

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
 Beyond Saving wrote: I

 

DP


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4196
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
well, if beyond is right

well, if beyond is right about these supreme court decisions--and i have no reason to doubt him--then i'm wrong about the frat having no case. my sincere apologies to EXC on that score. still, i disagree with those decisions. i have no idea how we legitimately go from "congress shall make no law" to universities not being able to enforce their own standards, even so-called state universities. have those decisions also been applied to private colleges and universities? if so, how do places like liberty university and bob jones university still exist? i still don't agree with a university education being called a "public benefit," and i still contend that university staff are not government employees.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3759
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:well, if beyond

iwbiek wrote:
well, if beyond is right about these supreme court decisions--and i have no reason to doubt him--then i'm wrong about the frat having no case. my sincere apologies to EXC on that score. still, i disagree with those decisions. i have no idea how we legitimately go from "congress shall make no law" to universities not being able to enforce their own standards, even so-called state universities. have those decisions also been applied to private colleges and universities? if so, how do places like liberty university and bob jones university still exist? i still don't agree with a university education being called a "public benefit," and i still contend that university staff are not government employees.

I think the key with this case was the speech done while on university property or at a university sponsored event. Certainly if they said this in an on campus dormitory,  they can kick them out.. I'm not sure what the relationship of fraternites is to the university.

I always assumed since their houses were off campus, they had no official releationship with a university. Perhaps not since the university can kick them out of their house(remember Animal House). But then why are the fraternites able to select who is a member  based upon race?

I don't believe there is such a thing as a private university anymore. The government still has semi-control over them via tax breaks, pell and research grants.

The Feds got Jerry Falwell to shut up and Bob Jones to stop being racist with tax exemption:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Jones_University_v._United_States

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3945
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Thanks Beyond. Perhaps we

Thanks Beyond.

Perhaps we should be more clear about what we mean when we're discussing the first amendment because there are several different subjects here.

Quote:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

1) How we think the law should be interpreted. 

2) How the courts interpret the laws. 

3) What we think should happen to the fraternity regardless of the law. 

 

On that note, I think the argument we had about how much direct control government has over public universities is not as relevant for 2) as it would be for 1).

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3360
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Latest news in BBC if anyone is interested

 www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-31881518

A Oklahoma fraternity whose members were filmed chanting a racist song has received death threats, a lawyer said.

Stephen Jones did not detail the threats that the University of Oklahoma students had received, but said authorities had been alerted.

The local chapter of Sigma Alpha Epsilon hired Mr Jones to "protect the rights" of its members, he said.

Two students were expelled and the fraternity house was closed after the video was posted online.

The video showed two members of the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity leading racist chants that said a black person would never be allowed to join the fraternity.

"Unfortunately, there have been some incidents involving current members of SAE where death threats have been placed, where there had been physical assaults or altercations on the University of Oklahoma campus, and where some of the students who are members have frankly been afraid to go to class," Mr Jones told reporters on Friday.

Mr Jones said there was "no justification" for the slur-laden chants.

 

The high-profile lawyer did not lay out explicit demands but said that he had been hired to protect the "due process" rights for the local chapter's members.

"We are interested - where needed - to act to protect the due process rights, the first amendment rights, and the fourteenth amendment rights of the members," he said told reporters.

He said that he was not seeking an apology from the university president, David Boren, who shut down the university's SAE chapter as the scandal unfolded earlier this week.

In response to the video, students rallied against racism and in support of the student group on Monday.

He also hinted at a possible dispute between the fraternity and the university over ownership of the fraternity's house.

He did not the rule out the possibility of lawsuit against the university, but said said he preferred a non-legal solution.

Mr Jones first came to prominence when he defended Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh in 1995.

 

Fraternities are social organisations that college students, usually male, are given the option to join at many universities across the US. Sororities are a similar option for female students.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5408
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 The links I

 The links I promised

supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/354/234/case.html

Sweezy v. New Hampshire

This was the first case to officially apply the First Amendment to state universities, the issue was a professor who refused to answer the questions regarding allegedly "subversive" (communist) comments he made in a lecture. 

caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl

Papish vs. University of Missouri

A student was expelled for writing in an underground newspaper that was considered indecent. The Court ruled in the students favor saying 

Quote:

the mere dissemination of ideas-no matter how offensive to good taste-on a state university campus may not be shut off in the name alone of ‘conventions of decency.'

law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/721/852/1419700/

Doe vs. University of Michigan, the first case to directly address speech codes. The code banned speech that created a "intimidating demeaning or hostile environment" on the basis of the usual protected classes (race, religion, sex etc.) 

There are a few other cases, a good summary of these and a few others for those who are interested that I have found is a brief written at 

www.rjglaw.com/rosennjenkinsgreenwald-business/docs/22.pdf

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13053
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I can't remember ever

I can't remember ever agreeing in principle with anything EXC said before.

I didn't read the article or anything so maybe I'll be off a bit from the actual incident in question. I'll be very specific and careful here.

1: Government has no business telling people what to think or say, unless under very specific circumstances. Like incitement to violence or false advertising. If someone wants to be a racist fuck in a fraternity of racist fucks doing racist things, that's their prerogative. As long as they aren't hurting anyone or trying to get other people to hurt people they can do what they like.

2: Publically funded institutions have no business telling people what to think or say, unless under very specific circumstances. Like incitement to violence or false advertising. If someone wants to be a racist fuck in a fraternity of racist fucks doing racist things, that's their prerogative. As long as they aren't hurting anyone or trying to get other people to hurt people they can do what they like.

3: ANY violation of this is a violation of free speech, and should be shut down immediately.

4: A private institution is a different story, but any expulsion should coincide with a complete refund of tuition costs (-materials like books). People don't go to university and pay thousands of dollars to get kicked out for something unrelated to their academic performance. You don't want them there, fine. Give them their money back.
If the private institution is publically funded, then it is effectively a public institution, and subject to the same rules as a public institution.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.