I think the Missouri football players just went on strike

[MakeItRain]

MIR, I'm a little confused-- do you think that link you posted refuted my point at all?

Uh no. Wouldn't that mean I didn't even read the subheadline and lede?

[8manpick]

Free speech should trump people's feelings pretty much always.  I hate the WBC, but I'm glad to live in a place where they can believe in and say what they want.

[Cartierfor3]

Well, I just think its noteworthy that cops are now asking students to call them because of speech. I don't agree with that, and that is the police abusing their authority IMO. Police should protect students, protect students rights, enforce laws, and that's about it. I've said what I'll say on that, and you guys are free to take this thread a different direction.

[MakeItRain]

FTR, the police thing was a university-wide email, according to the Volokh article.

Right but it was sent by the mizzou pd

[MakeItRain]

Well, I just think its noteworthy that cops are now asking students to call them because of speech. I don't agree with that, and that is the police abusing their authority IMO. Police should protect students, protect students rights, enforce laws, and that's about it. I've said what I'll say on that, and you guys are free to take this thread a different direction.

NO ONE AGREES WITH IT, CARTIER. mercy.

[DQ12]

MIR, I'm a little confused-- do you think that link you posted refuted my point at all?

Uh no. Wouldn't that mean I didn't even read the subheadline and lede?

Well given what you said earlier ("are you kidding..."), and the portion of the article where the guy tried to frame it as a school regulation issue and not a first amendment issue, I wasn't expecting the quick 180.

FTR, the police thing was a university-wide email, according to the Volokh article.

Right but it was sent by the mizzou pd

Right, but a little more than just a tweet.

[Cartierfor3]

Well, I just think its noteworthy that cops are now asking students to call them because of speech. I don't agree with that, and that is the police abusing their authority IMO. Police should protect students, protect students rights, enforce laws, and that's about it. I've said what I'll say on that, and you guys are free to take this thread a different direction.

NO ONE AGREES WITH IT, CARTIER. mercy.

that's good! 

[Rage Against the McKee]

i don't know who Claws is either?  is he a student at missouri?

He's #32.

http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?topic=36341.0

lol oh.  that's why i didn't know.

And that's an interesting question.  I'm really not sure what would happen if a student said that there.  I don't think he could be expelled, but I wonder if he could have his scholarship revoked or kicked off the team.  Maybe not!

Anyhow that's a little different than the situation at issue regarding "speech codes" at universities and expelling students for violations regarding "hate speech" (however that's defined).  I could link you to some cases and scholarship if you'd be interested in learning about the legality of limiting student speech on campuses.

I think he would be expelled.

I think you would be surprised to learn about the speech rights afforded to students in university settings.

He might sue and he might win, but the lawsuit would be cheaper than the fallout that would come about from keeping somebody on campus after that. There is no way somebody who says that on television while wearing a "K-State" jersey doesn't get kicked out of school.

[MakeItRain]

MIR, I'm a little confused-- do you think that link you posted refuted my point at all?

Uh no. Wouldn't that mean I didn't even read the subheadline and lede?

Well given what you said earlier ("are you kidding..."), and the portion of the article where the guy tried to frame it as a school regulation issue and not a first amendment issue, I wasn't expecting the quick 180.

FTR, the police thing was a university-wide email, according to the Volokh article.

Right but it was sent by the mizzou pd

Right, but a little more than just a tweet.

I read that article after but I certainly view it as a 180 at all. I was showing that this issue has ambiguity. I wholeheartedly disagree with your assessment that a student couldn't be expelled for hate speech, I mean it's already happened.
http://college.usatoday.com/2015/03/20/not-only-was-the-sae-student-expulsion-legal-it-was-right/

[gatoveintisiete]

These type of arguments are exhausting.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

 

These type of arguments are exhausting.

Yeah, but I'm just gonna sit back and enjoy watching MIR flail away as these campus radicals become increasingly fascist. 

[sonofdaxjones]

The notion that a university where the climate is such that a gay African American male can be elected student body president inherently engages in INSTITUTIONALIZED racism is patently abused on every conceivable level.   To think such literally renders the precept of institutionalized racism to the lowest and most impotent level of impact possible.   

[michigancat]

The notion that a university where the climate is such that a gay African American male can be elected student body president inherently engages in INSTITUTIONALIZED racism is patently abused on every conceivable level.   To think such literally renders the precept of institutionalized racism to the lowest and most impotent level of impact possible.   

yeah I mean the US elected a black president and people are crazy enough to think racism exists there too!

[star seed 7]

dax got a some new bullet points from kietz today 

[sonofdaxjones]

The notion that a university where the climate is such that a gay African American male can be elected student body president inherently engages in INSTITUTIONALIZED racism is patently abused on every conceivable level.   To think such literally renders the precept of institutionalized racism to the lowest and most impotent level of impact possible.   

yeah I mean the US elected a black president and people are crazy enough to think racism exists there too!

This isn't about racism in a population of 350 million people spread across 50 states on a continent,  it's about the ridiculous claim of "institutionalized racism" based on allegations (of which the university took immediate action when the perp was known), and policies that were very likely driven by budgetary constraints.   Where's the picture of the rabbit with the pancake on its head?

[sonofdaxjones]

dax got a some new bullet points from kietz today 

Didn't listen to one second of Keitzman today and rarely ever do anymore.   But thanks for the update.. 

[DQ12]

I wholeheartedly disagree with your assessment that a student couldn't be expelled for hate speech, I mean it's already happened.
http://college.usatoday.com/2015/03/20/not-only-was-the-sae-student-expulsion-legal-it-was-right/

I really don't know what to tell you.  The article you linked was written by two undergrads and doesn't cite a single bit of legal authority to support their conclusion that expelling the students was legal.  Frankly, it's a ridiculous article and I'm surprised USA Today even published it.  And just because OU got away with it doesn't mean much -- there have been countless instances of unchallenged constitutional violations throughout history.  Just because the "victim" doesn't challenge it in court doesn't make it legal or right. 

I pulled the following cases from a footnote in this article (http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1035&context=wmborj) which is written by one of the country's leading constitutional scholars. I'd invite you to read a few of these cases though, if you're genuinely interested:

http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/774/1163/1425792/(holding that university rule imposing punishment on students who took part in hate speech was unconstitutional)
http://cehdclass.gmu.edu/jkozlows/gmu1ay.htm(holding that discipline of fraternity by university for racial and sexual stereotypes at a social event was a violation of students' First Amendment rights)
http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/doe.html(holding that university policy against "stigmatizing or victimizing" individuals based on race, ethnicity, religion, etc., included within its scope speech protected by the First Amendment)

The fraternity one is the shortest and probably the most interesting.

[CHONGS]

To Devil's Advocate this, in a tense environment, police intervention could be seen as preventative.  No one said someone would be arrested, but I can imagine if a group of drunk idiots decided it they had enough with this "nonsense" and wanted to go to tell "those niggers to go home" it would be good if you overhead them on their way to a confrontation to tip off the cops.   Of course I could be completely wrong about this motivation, but I suspect it has its roots in trying head off further escalation in an already tense situation.

[star seed 7]

To Devil's Advocate this, in a tense environment, police intervention could be seen as preventative.  No one said someone would be arrested, but I can imagine if a group of drunk idiots decided it they had enough with this "nonsense" and wanted to go to tell "those niggers to go home" it would be good if you overhead them on their way to a confrontation to tip off the cops.   Of course I could be completely wrong about this motivation, but I suspect it has its roots in trying head off further escalation in an already tense situation.

yeah, this is my feeling as well.  i couldn't quite formulate it fully though.

[everyone shut up]

how often do the caucasians on this blog acknowledge their privilege? i stick with a breakfast/lunch/dinner routine so i don't forget. sometimes i get thrown off if i have a mid morning snack, but i suppose there's no harm in extra acknowledgement.

[michigancat]

how often do the caucasians on this blog acknowledge their privilege? i stick with a breakfast/lunch/dinner routine so i don't forget. sometimes i get thrown off if i have a mid morning snack, but i suppose there's no harm in extra acknowledgement.

I think about it every time I have to pee in public and waltz into a nice hotel lobby and no one gives me a second look.

[star seed 7]

how often do the caucasians on this blog acknowledge their privilege? i stick with a breakfast/lunch/dinner routine so i don't forget. sometimes i get thrown off if i have a mid morning snack, but i suppose there's no harm in extra acknowledgement.

I think about it every time I have to pee in public and waltz into a nice hotel lobby and no one gives me a second look.

i dress like a newly homeless person, so this privilege is not extended to me

[everyone shut up]

how often do the caucasians on this blog acknowledge their privilege? i stick with a breakfast/lunch/dinner routine so i don't forget. sometimes i get thrown off if i have a mid morning snack, but i suppose there's no harm in extra acknowledgement.

I think about it every time I have to pee in public and waltz into a nice hotel lobby and no one gives me a second look.

i appreciate your effort, michigancat

[michigancat]

how often do the caucasians on this blog acknowledge their privilege? i stick with a breakfast/lunch/dinner routine so i don't forget. sometimes i get thrown off if i have a mid morning snack, but i suppose there's no harm in extra acknowledgement.

I think about it every time I have to pee in public and waltz into a nice hotel lobby and no one gives me a second look.

i dress like a newly homeless person, so this privilege is not extended to me

I'm not far from that!

[420seriouscat69]

This night. Yikes!