Author Topic: More Liberal Censorship  (Read 181143 times)

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #350 on: March 10, 2015, 12:20:46 PM »
Some piece of shit fag sets up or causes problems for a true warrior...this is what happens when an agrieved class gets power in places they have no business being. They don't want to "serve honorably". They want to make the rest of us validate their life style.  This is exactly why many of us were against this shit in the first place.
L

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #351 on: March 10, 2015, 10:22:35 PM »
This is where we are headed.  They will try and censor pastors.  Dangerous territory.

Former SEALs chaplain could be kicked out of Navy for Christian beliefs
By Todd StarnesPublished March 09, 2015
FoxNews.com


Christian beliefs are definitely under attack in this country

http://mnutrailblazer.com/article/manuscript-of-dr-beckum-s-controversial-chapel-message

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #352 on: March 26, 2015, 10:51:53 AM »
Navy bans chaplain from ministering to family of dead sailor
By Todd Starnes
Published March 24, 2015
FoxNews.com

Chaplain Wes Modder prays over Navy service members. (Courtesy Liberty Institute)
It really takes a special kind of lowlife to stop a chaplain from ministering to the family and colleagues of a dead sailor.

But that’s exactly what happened last week at Naval Nuclear Power Training Command in Goose Creek, S.C., according to attorneys representing Chaplain Wes Modder.

It’s become clear to me Navy leadership cannot be trusted to protect religious liberty within the ranks. It’s time for our elected officials to intervene before Chaplain Modder’s commander brings more embarrassment and shame to the Armed Forces.

“For this Navy to bar a chaplain from comforting and ministering to sailors and families is a reprehensible violation of religious freedom and common human decency,” said Kelly Shackelford, the president of Liberty Institute, a law firm that specializes in religious liberty cases.

Some quick background before I explain what happened:

Chaplain Modder is facing the end of a stellar, 19-year-career in the Navy because he expressed his faith-based views on marriage and human sexuality during private counseling sessions with sailors.

Last December, a gay officer took offense at Christian chaplain’s take on homosexuality. Modder, who is endorsed by the Assemblies of God, was accused of discrimination and failing to show tolerance and respect, among other things.

Just a few months earlier, Modder’s commander had called him the “best of the best” and a “consummate professional leader.” But now he’s on the verge of being kicked out of the military.

Modder was relieved of his duties and temporarily reassigned pending the outcome of an investigation. The Navy has since denied the chaplain’s request to be reinstated.  for religious accommodation.

So that brings us to an incident that occurred last week, when a sailor in Modder’s previous unit unexpectedly died.

Liberty Institute attorney Michael Berry tells me Modder was about to reach out to the sailor’s grieving family when he was stopped by a member of the command.

He was slapped with a “no contact” order – the Navy’s version of a restraining order – banning him from providing counsel or ministering to any members of his unit.

“This Navy official is using the ‘no contact’ order as a weapon to punish and humiliate a decorated military chaplain,” Berry said. “To deny Chaplain Modder of the ability to minister to a grieving family and other sailors is deplorable.”

The Navy went so far as to banish Modder from the base on the day of the sailor’s memorial service. The chaplain said that was adding “insult to injury.”

“One of the most important things chaplains do is to provide comfort and care after a tragic death,” Modder said. “I am heartbroken for the family, and yet the Navy won’t allow me to do my job of helping them grieve and mourn.”

It’s beyond me why the Navy would treat a Marine and highly decorated chaplain with such derision. This is a man who was deployed multiple times during the War on Terror. This is a man who once led chaplains who ministered to Navy SEALs.

Tens of thousands of Americans have petitioned the Pentagon to reinstate Modder, and a number of high profile-political and religious figures – including Mike Huckabee, Sen. Ted Cruz, Franklin Graham and Family Research Council President Tony Perkins – have offered their support.

I reached out to the Chief of Chaplains’ office for comment, but they did not return my call. I can only hope the reason is because they are just as speechless as I am.

It’s become clear to me that Navy leadership cannot be trusted to protect religious liberty within the ranks. It’s time for our elected officials to intervene, before Chaplain Modder’s commander brings more embarrassment and shame to the Armed Forces.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/03/24/navy-bans-chaplain-from-ministering-to-family-dead-sailor/

Al Doggity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7286
  • Old School Gemini
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #353 on: March 26, 2015, 11:06:20 AM »
Navy bans chaplain from ministering to family of dead sailor


LOL. The greatest hack of them all.  ;)


Chaplain faces possible discharge for being 'intolerant'
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2015/03/10/chaplain-fired/24699275/

Navy Capt. Jon Fahs, NNPTC commander, cited several specific incidents in which Modder offered inappropriate counseling to sailors in the command, according to the detachment for cause letter. The letter states that Modder:

  • Told a female that she was "shaming herself in the eyes of god" for having premarital sex.
  • Told another student that homosexuality was wrong and that "the penis was meant for the vagina and not for the anus."
  • Suggested to a student that he, Modder, had the ability to "save" gay people.
  • "Berated" a student for becoming pregnant while not married.

The issue arose after multiple sailors filed equal opportunity complaints about Modder with the command, alleging discrimination.

When confronted with the complaints, Modder told his command that "he will not follow Navy policy if it conflicts with his faith," according to the letter.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #354 on: March 26, 2015, 11:09:20 AM »
LOL. The greatest hack of them all.  ;)


Chaplain faces possible discharge for being 'intolerant'
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2015/03/10/chaplain-fired/24699275/

Navy Capt. Jon Fahs, NNPTC commander, cited several specific incidents in which Modder offered inappropriate counseling to sailors in the command, according to the detachment for cause letter. The letter states that Modder:

  • Told a female that she was "shaming herself in the eyes of god" for having premarital sex.
  • Told another student that homosexuality was wrong and that "the penis was meant for the vagina and not for the anus."
  • Suggested to a student that he, Modder, had the ability to "save" gay people.
  • "Berated" a student for becoming pregnant while not married.

The issue arose after multiple sailors filed equal opportunity complaints about Modder with the command, alleging discrimination.

When confronted with the complaints, Modder told his command that "he will not follow Navy policy if it conflicts with his faith," according to the letter.

Wow.  Breaking news.  Except for my post about this on the previous page.

Quote
This is where we are headed.  They will try and censor pastors.  Dangerous territory.

Former SEALs chaplain could be kicked out of Navy for Christian beliefs
By Todd StarnesPublished March 09, 2015
FoxNews.com

Navy Chaplain Wes Modder is pictured with a ceremonial oar presented to him by Naval Special Warfare Command. He received the oar at the end of his tour. (Courtesy Wes Modder)

A chaplain who once ministered to Navy SEALs could be thrown out of the military after he was accused of failing “to show tolerance and respect” in private counseling sessions in regards to issues pertaining to faith, marriage and sexuality, specifically homosexuality and pre-marital sex, according to documents obtained exclusively by Fox News.

Lt. Commander Wes Modder, who is endorsed by the Assemblies of God, has also been accused of being unable to “function in the diverse and pluralistic environment” of the Naval Nuclear Power Training Command in Goose Creek, S.C.

“On multiple occasions he discriminated against students who were of different faiths and backgrounds,” the Chaplain’s commanding Officer Capt. Jon R. Fahs wrote in a memorandum obtained by Fox News.

Modder told me he was devastated by the accusations. He believes charges have been trumped up.

Modder is a highly decorated, 19-year veteran of the military. Prior to becoming a Navy chaplain, he served in the Marine Corps.  His assignments included tours with the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit and Naval Special Warfare Command – where he served as the Force Chaplain of the Navy SEALs.

His record is brimming with accolades and endorsements – including from Capt. Fahs.

In Modder’s most recent review, Fahs declared that the chaplain was “the best of the best,” and a “consummate professional leader” worthy of an early promotion.

So how did Chaplain Modder go from being the “best of the best” to being unfit for service in the U.S. military in a span of five months?

The Navy did not return my calls seeking comment – so all we can do is rely on their written accusations and evidence.

Michael Berry, a military veteran and attorney with Liberty Institute a law firm that specializes in religious liberty cases is representing Modder. He accused the military of committing a gross injustice against the chaplain in a letter to the Navy. He told me they will respond forcefully and resolutely to the allegations – which they categorically deny.

“We are starting to see cases where chaplains have targets on their backs,” Berry said. “They have to ask themselves, ‘Do I stay true to my faith or do I keep my job?’”

He said Modder is being punished because of his Christian faith.

“They want chaplains to be glorified summer camp counselors and not speak truth and love into people’s lives,” Berry told me. “There are some anti-religious elements in our military. Anytime somebody wants to live their faith out – there are people who say that is offensive.”

Modder told me he was devastated by the accusations. He believes charges have been trumped up.

“The military now wants a 2.0 chaplain instead of a legacy chaplain,” Modder said. “They want a chaplain to accommodate policy that contradicts Scripture.”

Modder’s troubles started on Dec. 6 when an assistant in his office showed up to work with a pair of Equal Opportunity representatives and a five-page complaint documenting grievances against the chaplain.

The lieutenant junior grade officer went on to detail concerns about Moody’s views on “same-sex relationships/marriages, homosexuality, different standards of respect for men and women, pre-marital sex and masturbation.”

Modder said the young officer had only been working with him for about a month and would constantly pepper him with questions pertaining to homosexuality. He had no idea that the officer was in fact gay – and married to another man.

“His five page letter of complaint was unconscionable,” Modder said. “He said I had a behavioral pattern of being anti-discriminatory of same sex orientation.”

The chaplain was not even given a chance to defend himself. He was immediately removed from duties and told to clean out his office.

“It was insulting and it was devastating,” Modder said. “I felt discriminated against. How could something like this happen at this stage of my career?”

Zollie Smith, the executive director for the Assemblies of God, U.S. Missions, told me they stand firmly behind the chaplain.

“We stand behind him 100 percent,” he said.

In hindsight, Berry believes the officer was setting up his client – and in doing so may have committed a crime.

“I believe some of what the lieutenant has alleged could constitute a military crime – false statements – taking what the chaplain said and twisting or misconstruing it – in an attempt to get the chaplain punished,” he said. “He abused the position he was placed in as a chaplain’s assistant.”

He believes the officer may have gained access to private counseling file

“To be clear, Chaplain Modder does not dispute that during private, one-on-one pastoral care and counseling sessions, he expressed his sincerely held religious belief that: sexual acts outside of marriage are contrary to Biblical teaching; and homosexual behavior is contrary to Biblical teaching; and homosexual orientation or temptation, as distinct from conduct, is not sin,” Berry said.

Modder said many Americans may be shocked to discover how much military culture has changed over the past few years.

“This new generation is very secular and very open sexually,” he said. “The values that the military once held – just like the Boy Scouts of America – are changing. The culture wants this. Culture is colliding with truth. That’s at the heart of this.”

Modder recalled an incident that occurred when he first arrived on the base. He was about to deliver the invocation at a graduation ceremony when the captain pulled him aside.

“He looked at me and said, ‘Hey chaplain – do not pray in Jesus’ name,’” he recalled.

Modder said he understands the firestorm he is about to enter – but he remains resolute.

“Every fiber in my being wants to run away from this – but if I do I’m not being obedient to the Lord,” he told me. “I need to stand up for righteousness and this is something I cannot walk away from.”

The reality is that many other chaplains could find themselves in Chaplain Modder’s shoes. The Roman Catholic church and the Southern Baptist convention have nearly identical positions on the issues that the Navy found problematic with Modder.

“It’s going to be a hard road for me,” he said. “But it’s what God has called me to do.”

Ultimately, it’s about leaving a legacy and setting an example for his family – his wife and four young children.

The day he was relieved of his duties, Chaplain Modder’s 14-year-old son tagged along to help pack up his dad’s office. A few senior enlisted men were there as well.

As they were driving away, the boy told his father that the enlisted men had spoken to him.

“They told my son that ‘you can be proud of your father because he’s keeping the faith,’” Modder said. “The whole command knows that Chaplain Modder is keeping the faith.”

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/03/09/former-seals-chaplain-could-be-kicked-out-navy-for-christian-beliefs/

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #355 on: March 26, 2015, 11:10:08 AM »
Some of this is wrong but if you go to a chaplain for this kind of thing they don't leave their beliefs at the door. There are other alternatives to this. I don't understand why a gay junior officer was in the chaplains's office in the first place.
L

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #356 on: March 26, 2015, 11:12:47 AM »
Some of this is wrong but if you go to a chaplain for this kind of thing they don't leave their beliefs at the door. There are other alternatives to this. I don't understand why a gay junior officer was in the chaplains's office in the first place.

Probably to set him up. 

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #357 on: March 26, 2015, 11:16:04 AM »
I'm pretty secular....I always ask a chaplain what he is..so I know how much my Irish Catholic mouth can get away with.  I have really never run into this.
L

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #358 on: March 26, 2015, 11:18:10 AM »
If someone seeks the advice and counsel of a Christian chaplain, they should not be surprised or offended when he talks about his Christian beliefs. 

But there is an effort to silence those folks (both in the military and out).  Talk about the tail wagging the dog. 

Al Doggity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7286
  • Old School Gemini
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #359 on: March 26, 2015, 11:20:38 AM »
Wow.  Breaking news.  Except for my post about this on the previous page.


There were several complaints. Not just 1.  ::)

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #360 on: March 26, 2015, 11:22:50 AM »
Yeah and I suspect that the first few went away and then he was targeted. Oddly enough that shit happens now.
L

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #361 on: March 26, 2015, 11:24:19 AM »
There were several complaints. Not just 1.  ::)

Really?  You must have learned that from the article I posted.   ::)

Al Doggity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7286
  • Old School Gemini
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #362 on: March 26, 2015, 11:26:30 AM »
Really?  You must have learned that from the article I posted.   ::)

Neither of the articles you posted list the other complaints.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #363 on: March 26, 2015, 11:31:14 AM »
Neither of the articles you posted list the other complaints.

You mean it didn't say this?  “On multiple occasions he discriminated against students who were of different faiths and backgrounds,” the Chaplain’s commanding Officer Capt. Jon R. Fahs wrote in a memorandum obtained by Fox News.

Al Doggity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7286
  • Old School Gemini
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #364 on: March 26, 2015, 11:41:55 AM »
You mean it didn't say this?  “On multiple occasions he discriminated against students who were of different faiths and backgrounds,” the Chaplain’s commanding Officer Capt. Jon R. Fahs wrote in a memorandum obtained by Fox News.


That's hardly a list and both articles heavily implied that everything came down to one case.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #365 on: April 23, 2015, 11:04:12 AM »
Liberals can be such pansies.  Afraid of opposing viewpoints. 

Growing trend of students protesting campus speakers they don't agree with
Published April 23, 2015
FoxNews.com

MEGYN KELLY, HOST: Another report tonight from an American college campus where some students want to silence a speaker they don't happen to agree with.

Students at a public university in Texas are petitioning against their own Governor Greg Abbott as their graduation speaker because they say, well, he's just not diverse enough and does "not align the spirit" of the University of North Texas.

In just the last two -- the last week, I should say, two other colleges were at the center of controversy after students protested a conservative author who had been invited to speak about sexual assault.

Students complained that her mere presence was offensive they needed to spoke trigger warnings on campus, so people could get prepared to deal with their upset.

Joining me now -- warning, here she comes, that author. Cristina Hoff Sommers, who is outspoken feminist and a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Great to see you, Christina.

(CROSSTALK)

CHRISTINA HOFF SOMMERS, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE SCHOLAR: Great to be here.

KELLY: They only have that label feminist because you're the kind of feminist they believed in and you don't say the stuff they want to say. And therefore, they want you to check your mouth. And if you don't check your mouth then everyone needs to be held before you come on campus and told that they can go to their safe space if you have the nerve to show up.

SOMMERS: Yes they have to -- they have safe rooms where they go. At Brown University, for example, they have played-doh and bubbles and tape recordings of puppy dogs, it is so infantilizing (ph). It is so shocking to me as a philosophy professor, that free speech, free expression, I mean, the campus has become a hostile environment for free expression.

KELLY: As I understand it, when you were going to Georgetown University to speak, they had to create safe zone for people who are so overwhelmed by your presence there. It's like I can't...

(CROSSTALK)

SOMMERS: And Kelly when they wanted...

KELLY: And in the meantime you had been receiving so many threats for your mere appearance. They had to give you a security guard to maintain your actual physical safety.

SOMMERS: I don't know if there were threats but the tone of the criticism is on Facebook postings and other places alarmed the campus authorities so they thought perhaps I need protection from these safe spacers.

KELLY: Did they give you a play-doh? I mean, were like a -- did you authorize.

SOMMERS: I sort of it -- I would say it went over, I wouldn't reminded going to their safe room because it was so intense. I walk into the hall and it's filled. They kept changing the room because there were greater numbers of people wanted to come to protest leaving on campus. The room was filled with people with posters and placards and then the...

(CROSSTALK)

KELLY: It's like we are ruining the upcoming generation. Life doesn't involve only people who think the way you think college students. You have to kind of get used to people with opposing views.

SOMMERS: Exactly. And you know, it used to be people would come and debate me or they wouldn't like my views. Now, they say I pose a threat to their safety. And I'm moderate liberal feminist. There is nothing incendiary about my views. That's what also shocking as the...

KELLY: You don't buy the full dogma about things like the numbers about sexual assaults in campus neither just Brit Hume, neither do a lot of people who aren't sexists or misogynist.

SOMMERS: Neither do a lot of -- if campus feminist who speak out against it. But as one professor did at Northwestern, Laura Kepner, she spoke out against the sort of rape culture rhetoric in the trigger warnings in the chronicle of higher education. Well, her article triggered students and they are demanding that she be sanctioned and it's very bad. It's a real threat to freedom.

KELLY: You know it -- I end this segment with the profound words of my old trainer, Dave, back in the day when I still worked out. Toughen up, buttercup. That's what those college students need to be told. Christina, good to see you.

SOMMERS: Thank you.

http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2015/04/23/growing-trend-students-protesting-campus-speakers-dont-agree-with/

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #366 on: April 23, 2015, 11:05:23 AM »
Univ Students Want Gov. Abbott Removed as Graduation Speaker
Apr 22, 2015

University of North Texas students have created a petition asking school officials to replace Gov. Greg Abbott as the keynote speaker for the spring commencement ceremony.

The petition on Change.org has garnered more than 2,495 signatures. It focuses on the fact that some students have political disagreements with the Republican governor.

“The University of North Texas’ student body is made up of students from all walks of life,” the petition reads. “Therefore, it is pivotal that our keynote speaker be someone who reflects not only our student population but our views on equality and representation. Governor Abbott is an advocate for immigration reform, border patrol, and anti-equal marriage laws.”

The creators of the petition also stated that Abbott's views do “not align the spirit of the University of North Texas which prides itself in providing equal opportunities for their students.”

Neal Smatresk, the university's president, told the Star-Telegram that he's not going to replace Abbott with another speaker.

Read more from the Star-Telegram:

“He’s a new governor, he’s supportive of higher education,” said Smatresk, who became UNT’s president last year. “Why wouldn’t we want to celebrate the success of our institution in its 125th year with him?

“I feel it’s a great way to celebrate.”

Despite the controversy swirling around his appearance — most via social media — Abbott plans to honor his commitment.

“Gov. Abbott is honored to accept the invitation to address the University of North Texas’ commencement, and he looks forward to recognizing the great work UNT is doing to elevate Texas’ higher education system, as well as the contributions that the UNT Class of 2015 will make to build a better future for Texas,” said Amelia Chasse, press secretary for the governor.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/04/22/texas-university-students-want-gov-greg-abbott-removed-graduation-speaker

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #367 on: May 28, 2015, 11:42:35 AM »
The marketplace of ideas, so long as they are liberal ideas.  Some liberals can be so weak minded.

Texas student sues after college bans gun rights sign
By  Maxim Lott
Published May 28, 2015
FoxNews.com

A Texas college student filed suit against her school this week, saying her constitutional rights were violated when she was shooed off the quad for displaying a pro-Second Amendment sign.

Nicole Sanders, 24, who attends Blinn College, a two-year public college in Brenham, Texas, said she and a classmate at the 18,000-student school were holding signs near the student center in February when they were told to move. Sanders' sign read, “Defend Gun Rights on Campus,” and the other said “LOL,” with President Obama’s logo as the “O.” The pair was trying to attract members for a student group they were forming, a chapter of Young Americans for Liberty.

Sanders claims a college official accompanied by three armed campus police officers approached and said someone had complained that their display was offensive and that they wouldn’t be allowed to do it again unless they got “special permission.” According to Sanders, the official added that it was unlikely such permission would be granted to advocate for gun rights.

“When you have to get a permit before you can speak, it shuts down ideas – everything gets censored through the administrators,” Sanders, who is studying political science, told FoxNews.com. "It's unconstitutional for a public university to limit speech to one area of campus. I think that college should be a marketplace of ideas.”


"When you have to get permit before you can speak, it shuts down ideas."

- Nicole Sanders, Blinn College student

There was an option, Sanders says she was told. She and her classmate, Chris Bradford, who is not part of the suit, could display their signs at a “free speech area” off to the side of the campus center, roughly the size of two parking spaces, where few would see her.

“You only get so many people there,” Sanders told FoxNews.com.

Her lawsuit, which is being filed in federal court in Austin with the help of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), also alleges that her ceramics professor, David Peck, tried to intimidate her into not suing the school. The suit alleges that he warned her that he would “protect me and mine” from accusations against Blinn College and that Sanders “better think” before taking further action.

Blinn College student Nicole Sanders, (l.), is suing after school officials told her she could not display the sign shown at right in a heavily-trafficked area of campus. (Courtesy: FIRE/Jenifer Morris)

Peck did not respond to a request for comment Friday. University spokesman Jeff Tilley said the school is evaluating its policies.

“We certainly will take this opportunity to evaluate our policies as they are written and as they are applied by faculty and staff," Tilley said. "We will evaluate whether any misunderstandings may have occurred. Because of our commitment to our students and to the law, we are confident that we will be able to resolve any concerns that have been raised.”

Tilley said the school has a policy not to discriminate based on politics, but that it can have reasonable restrictions to ensure order.

“Blinn College is allowed to implement what the courts call “time, place and manner” regulations to ensure that the operations of the college, including classes in session, are not disrupted,” he said.

First Amendment legal experts say Sanders has a strong case if they can show other types of speech were permitted in the same area.

"If they can prove that they were specially denied because they were for gun rights, then it would be unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination,” Eugene Volokh, a law professor at UCLA who specializes in the First Amendment, told FoxNews.com.

He added that it also was constitutional in another way.

“On government property, even in an airport outside the security cordon, bans on leafleting and other 'low footprint' speech would be unconstitutional,” he said.

Despite that, such bans are common on universities. Volokh attributes that to a bureaucratic mindset.

“Colleges are government institutions. They are run by people who see their primary job as making everything run smoothly, with a minimum of complaints and a minimum of upset. It takes publicity, and often a lawsuit, for them to realize ‘Well, there is this legal rule that we need to be following,'" he said.

FIRE often files such lawsuits, and recently won a case against the University of Hawaii, which tried to ban students from handing out the U.S. Constitution in most areas of campus, and only reversed course after being sued.

Sanders' lawyer is optimistic about this case.

“Blinn College thinks it’s acceptable to have a free speech zone that is the size of a parking spot," FIRE lawyer Catherine Sevcenko said. "But the Constitution’s free speech zone is the size of the United States.”

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/05/28/texas-student-sues-after-college-bans-gun-rights-sign/?intcmp=latestnews

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #368 on: June 08, 2015, 09:52:51 AM »
Shocking at Vox: 'I'm a Liberal Professor, and My Liberal Students Terrify Me'
By Laura Flint | June 6, 2015

A top article trending on Vox, an exclusively online (and leftward leaning) news platform is entitled "I'm a liberal professor, and my liberal students terrify me." According to a professor of a "mid-size state school" who preferred to remain anonymous to protect his job, "The student-teacher dynamic has been re-envisioned along a line that's simultaneously consumerist and hyper-protective, giving each and every student the ability to claim Grievous Harm in nearly any circumstance, after any affront, and a teacher's formal ability to respond to these claims is limited at best."

Of course for anyone paying a speck of attention to the free speech environments of American campuses, this is nothing new. In 2012, George Will penned an article in The Washington Post entitled "Colleges have free speech on the run." He described, "The right never to be annoyed, a new campus entitlement" and the "Legions of administrators, who now outnumber full-time faculty, are kept busy making students mind their manners, with good manners understood as conformity to liberal politics."

Meanwhile FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education), whose president Greg Lukianoff describes himself as "a liberal, pro-choice, pro-gay rights, lifelong Democrat," has been trying to bring the lack of free speech on public and private college campuses to public attention since its founding in 1999.

But no matter. Now that college intellectual oppression is affecting not only the few conservative professors who dared to enter the polarized world of American academia but also liberal professors, some in the liberal media are prepared to listen.

The professor described the he fear he held that students would rate him poorly on evaluations or report him for insensitivity to the administration if he assigned readings that "affect the student's emotional state." He pointed to "a simplistic, unworkable, and ultimately stifling conception of social justice" that focuses on emotions, as the culprit for turning millennial students into fragile flowers.

According to the professor, this trend toward ever-increasing censorship "affects liberal, socially conscious teachers much more than conservative ones." It remains unclear how that logic pans out. However, he also believes these conservative professors will be liberal academia's savior from itself, as "there's nothing much to do other than sit on our hands and wait for the ascension of conservative political backlash."

PS: The Wall Street Journal had the story of students going after liberal prof Laura Kipnis for an essay on "growing sexual paranoia" on campuses.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/laura-flint/2015/06/06/shocking-vox-im-liberal-professor-and-my-liberal-students-terrify-me#sthash.9tTY8l27.dpuf

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #369 on: September 07, 2015, 01:21:19 PM »
Navy bans chaplain from ministering to family of dead sailor
By Todd Starnes
Published March 24, 2015
FoxNews.com

Chaplain Wes Modder prays over Navy service members. (Courtesy Liberty Institute)
It really takes a special kind of lowlife to stop a chaplain from ministering to the family and colleagues of a dead sailor.

But that’s exactly what happened last week at Naval Nuclear Power Training Command in Goose Creek, S.C., according to attorneys representing Chaplain Wes Modder.

It’s become clear to me Navy leadership cannot be trusted to protect religious liberty within the ranks. It’s time for our elected officials to intervene before Chaplain Modder’s commander brings more embarrassment and shame to the Armed Forces.

“For this Navy to bar a chaplain from comforting and ministering to sailors and families is a reprehensible violation of religious freedom and common human decency,” said Kelly Shackelford, the president of Liberty Institute, a law firm that specializes in religious liberty cases.

Some quick background before I explain what happened:

Chaplain Modder is facing the end of a stellar, 19-year-career in the Navy because he expressed his faith-based views on marriage and human sexuality during private counseling sessions with sailors.

Last December, a gay officer took offense at Christian chaplain’s take on homosexuality. Modder, who is endorsed by the Assemblies of God, was accused of discrimination and failing to show tolerance and respect, among other things.

Just a few months earlier, Modder’s commander had called him the “best of the best” and a “consummate professional leader.” But now he’s on the verge of being kicked out of the military.

Modder was relieved of his duties and temporarily reassigned pending the outcome of an investigation. The Navy has since denied the chaplain’s request to be reinstated.  for religious accommodation.

So that brings us to an incident that occurred last week, when a sailor in Modder’s previous unit unexpectedly died.

Liberty Institute attorney Michael Berry tells me Modder was about to reach out to the sailor’s grieving family when he was stopped by a member of the command.

He was slapped with a “no contact” order – the Navy’s version of a restraining order – banning him from providing counsel or ministering to any members of his unit.

“This Navy official is using the ‘no contact’ order as a weapon to punish and humiliate a decorated military chaplain,” Berry said. “To deny Chaplain Modder of the ability to minister to a grieving family and other sailors is deplorable.”

The Navy went so far as to banish Modder from the base on the day of the sailor’s memorial service. The chaplain said that was adding “insult to injury.”

“One of the most important things chaplains do is to provide comfort and care after a tragic death,” Modder said. “I am heartbroken for the family, and yet the Navy won’t allow me to do my job of helping them grieve and mourn.”

It’s beyond me why the Navy would treat a Marine and highly decorated chaplain with such derision. This is a man who was deployed multiple times during the War on Terror. This is a man who once led chaplains who ministered to Navy SEALs.

Tens of thousands of Americans have petitioned the Pentagon to reinstate Modder, and a number of high profile-political and religious figures – including Mike Huckabee, Sen. Ted Cruz, Franklin Graham and Family Research Council President Tony Perkins – have offered their support.

I reached out to the Chief of Chaplains’ office for comment, but they did not return my call. I can only hope the reason is because they are just as speechless as I am.

It’s become clear to me that Navy leadership cannot be trusted to protect religious liberty within the ranks. It’s time for our elected officials to intervene, before Chaplain Modder’s commander brings more embarrassment and shame to the Armed Forces.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/03/24/navy-bans-chaplain-from-ministering-to-family-dead-sailor/

Navy exonerates chaplain accused of being anti-gay
By Todd Starnes 
Published September 04, 2015


Wes Modder

A Navy chaplain accused of failing to show “tolerance and respect” toward gay sailors has been cleared of all wrongdoing and will not be removed from the military.

“I am relieved the Navy sided with me,” Lt. Cmdr. Wes Modder told me.

Join Todd’s American Dispatch - a Must-Read for Conservatives

Modder, a highly decorated veteran who once ministered to an elite Navy SEAL unit, had been given a “detachment for cause” letter in February.

He was removed from his job after his commander accused him of being intolerant and unable to “function in the diverse and pluralistic environment” of the Naval Nuclear Power Training Command in Goose Creek, S.C.

“On multiple occasions he discriminated against students who were of different faiths and backgrounds,” wrote Capt. Jon R. Fahs, the chaplain’s commanding officer, in a memorandum obtained by Fox News.

Navy Personnel Command rejected the commander’s recommendation to fire Modder, Military Times reported.

“There is no documentation of poor performance in his personnel record,” one unnamed officer told the newspaper.

Instead, the chaplain, who is endorsed by the Assemblies of God, was cleared of all wrongdoing and will be allowed to retire — marking the end of nearly 20 years of military service.

“This is not only a great day for Chaplain Modder, but for every American who supports religious freedom in our military,” said Michael Berry, the chaplain’s attorney.

Berry is an attorney with Liberty Institute, one of the nation’s largest law firms specializing in religious liberty cases. They partnered with the law firm of WilmerHale to defend Modder.

“Although Captain Fahs’ actions against Chaplain Modder violated the Constitution, federal law and military regulations, we are grateful that Navy officials categorically rejected those actions,” Berry said.

“We believed this would be the outcome from day one.”Berry said the popular Navy chaplain was the victim of a setup.

Earlier this year, a gay married officer was assigned to be Modder’s assistant. The assistant initiated the complaint against the chaplain because of his views on homosexuality and same-sex relationships.

“I believe some of what the lieutenant has alleged could constitute a military crime - false statements, taking what the chaplain said and twisting or misconstruing it in an attempt to get the chaplain punished,” Berry told me.

Modder had also been accused of telling a woman that she was “shaming herself in the eyes of God” for having premarital sex and for berating an unmarried student for becoming pregnant.

Liberty Institute President Kelly Shackelford commended the Navy for exonerating their client and called it a victory for religious liberty.

“We always knew that when the facts came to light, the Navy would exonerate Chaplain Modder,” Shackelford said. “Religious liberty is our first freedom and essential for our men and women in uniform.

”It’s unfortunate that a good man like Chaplain Wes Modder has been subjected to public scorn and ridicule because of a young officer’s witch hunt. However, truth won the day and Chaplain Modder should be commended for his courage under fire and his long years of service to the United States Armed Forces."

And let this be a warning to those officers who might try to target other military chaplains. Your misdeeds will be exposed.

“We hope this sends a strong signal to military commanders — violating religious liberty will not be tolerated,” Shackelford told me. 

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/09/04/navy-exonerates-chaplain-accused-being-anti-gay.html

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #370 on: October 12, 2015, 10:46:39 AM »
D.N.C. Officer Says She Was Disinvited From Debate After Calling for More of Them

Representative Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, a vice chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, said she was disinvited from the first Democratic presidential primary debate in Nevada after she appeared on television and called for more face-offs.

Ms. Gabbard confirmed on Sunday that her chief of staff received a message last Tuesday from the chief of staff to Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the national committee, about her attendance at the debate. A day earlier, Ms. Gabbard had appeared on MSNBC and said there should be an increase beyond the current six sanctioned debates.

A person close to the committee who asked for anonymity to discuss internal discussions insisted, however, that Ms. Gabbard had not been disinvited. Instead, the person said, an aide to Ms. Wasserman Schultz expressed a desire to keep the focus on the candidates as the debate approached, rather than on a “distraction” that could divide the party, and suggested that if Ms. Gabbard could not do that, she should reconsider going.

Ms. Gabbard insisted otherwise.

“When I first came to Washington, one of the things that I was disappointed about was there’s a lot of immaturity and petty gamesmanship that goes on, and it kind of reminds me of how high school teenagers act,” Ms. Gabbard said in a telephone interview on Sunday night. She said she would watch the debate in her district in Hawaii, which elected her to her second term last year.

“It’s very dangerous when we have people in positions of leadership who use their power to try to quiet those who disagree with them,” she added. “When I signed up to be vice chair of the D.N.C., no one told me I would be relinquishing my freedom of speech and checking it at the door.”

Holly Shulman, a spokeswoman for the committee, said the desire was to allow the Democrats to present a clear contrast with the Republicans.

“The focus of the debate in Nevada as well as the other debates and forums in the coming weeks should be on the candidates who will take the stage, and their vision to move America forward,” she said. “All that was asked of Ms. Gabbard’s staff was to prioritize our candidates and this important opportunity they have to introduce themselves to the American people. The Democratic Party is a big-tent party, and we embrace the diversity of opinions and ideas that come from our members.”

Ms. Gabbard and R.T. Rybak, a committee vice chairman and a former mayor of Minneapolis, have for weeks publicly called for more debates.

“More and more people on the ground from states all across the country are calling for more debates, are wanting to have this transparency and greater engagement in our democratic process at a critical time, as they make the decision of who should be the next person to lead our country,” Ms. Gabbard said in her MSNBC appearance.

The next day, two people briefed on the conversations said, the chief of staff to Ms. Wasserman Schultz reached out to her counterpart in Ms. Gabbard’s office about attending the debate. Weeks earlier, Ms. Gabbard had said she would like tickets for herself and a guest to the Nevada debate, the one closest to Hawaii.

The person close to the committee insisted: “She was not uninvited. The D.N.C. team wanted this first debate to have all the focus on the candidates. Gabbard’s people were told that if they couldn’t commit to that, since Tulsi was trying to publicly divide the D.N.C. leadership last week, then they should consider not coming.”

The person added, “The fact that she is still making this about her and not our great candidates by talking to The New York Times says something unfortunate.”

Ms. Gabbard said the only issue raised had been “the fact that I had publicly disagreed” with Ms. Wasserman Schultz.

“This isn’t about any one person,” Ms. Gabbard said. “It’s about how the Democratic Party should be representing democratic values, allowing for free speech and open debate within our party, and for more transparency and debates for our presidential candidates.”

“All of our candidates agree with my position,” she added.

Former Gov. Martin O’Malley of Maryland, who has been struggling to gain traction in the Democratic primary contest, has been calling for more debates and has accused Ms. Wasserman Schultz of trying to benefit the leader in the polls, Hillary Rodham Clinton, by limiting debates. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont has also called for more debates, although he has not been as adamant as Mr. O’Malley has.

People who disagree with Mr. O’Malley have pointed out that he infrequently debated his challenger for governor in Maryland. And they note the number of sanctioned debates is the same as in the 2008 race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

But there were more than a dozen unsanctioned debates and forums back then. This time, the candidates could be excluded from the sanctioned debates if they take part in ones that are not approved by the national committee.

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/12/d-n-c-officer-says-she-was-disinvited-from-debate-after-calling-for-more-of-them/?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #371 on: October 14, 2015, 01:03:26 PM »
D.N.C. Officer Says She Was Disinvited From Debate After Calling for More of Them

Representative Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, a vice chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, said she was disinvited from the first Democratic presidential primary debate in Nevada after she appeared on television and called for more face-offs.

Ms. Gabbard confirmed on Sunday that her chief of staff received a message last Tuesday from the chief of staff to Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the national committee, about her attendance at the debate. A day earlier, Ms. Gabbard had appeared on MSNBC and said there should be an increase beyond the current six sanctioned debates.

A person close to the committee who asked for anonymity to discuss internal discussions insisted, however, that Ms. Gabbard had not been disinvited. Instead, the person said, an aide to Ms. Wasserman Schultz expressed a desire to keep the focus on the candidates as the debate approached, rather than on a “distraction” that could divide the party, and suggested that if Ms. Gabbard could not do that, she should reconsider going.

Ms. Gabbard insisted otherwise.

“When I first came to Washington, one of the things that I was disappointed about was there’s a lot of immaturity and petty gamesmanship that goes on, and it kind of reminds me of how high school teenagers act,” Ms. Gabbard said in a telephone interview on Sunday night. She said she would watch the debate in her district in Hawaii, which elected her to her second term last year.

“It’s very dangerous when we have people in positions of leadership who use their power to try to quiet those who disagree with them,” she added. “When I signed up to be vice chair of the D.N.C., no one told me I would be relinquishing my freedom of speech and checking it at the door.”

Holly Shulman, a spokeswoman for the committee, said the desire was to allow the Democrats to present a clear contrast with the Republicans.

“The focus of the debate in Nevada as well as the other debates and forums in the coming weeks should be on the candidates who will take the stage, and their vision to move America forward,” she said. “All that was asked of Ms. Gabbard’s staff was to prioritize our candidates and this important opportunity they have to introduce themselves to the American people. The Democratic Party is a big-tent party, and we embrace the diversity of opinions and ideas that come from our members.”

Ms. Gabbard and R.T. Rybak, a committee vice chairman and a former mayor of Minneapolis, have for weeks publicly called for more debates.

“More and more people on the ground from states all across the country are calling for more debates, are wanting to have this transparency and greater engagement in our democratic process at a critical time, as they make the decision of who should be the next person to lead our country,” Ms. Gabbard said in her MSNBC appearance.

The next day, two people briefed on the conversations said, the chief of staff to Ms. Wasserman Schultz reached out to her counterpart in Ms. Gabbard’s office about attending the debate. Weeks earlier, Ms. Gabbard had said she would like tickets for herself and a guest to the Nevada debate, the one closest to Hawaii.

The person close to the committee insisted: “She was not uninvited. The D.N.C. team wanted this first debate to have all the focus on the candidates. Gabbard’s people were told that if they couldn’t commit to that, since Tulsi was trying to publicly divide the D.N.C. leadership last week, then they should consider not coming.”

The person added, “The fact that she is still making this about her and not our great candidates by talking to The New York Times says something unfortunate.”

Ms. Gabbard said the only issue raised had been “the fact that I had publicly disagreed” with Ms. Wasserman Schultz.

“This isn’t about any one person,” Ms. Gabbard said. “It’s about how the Democratic Party should be representing democratic values, allowing for free speech and open debate within our party, and for more transparency and debates for our presidential candidates.”

“All of our candidates agree with my position,” she added.

Former Gov. Martin O’Malley of Maryland, who has been struggling to gain traction in the Democratic primary contest, has been calling for more debates and has accused Ms. Wasserman Schultz of trying to benefit the leader in the polls, Hillary Rodham Clinton, by limiting debates. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont has also called for more debates, although he has not been as adamant as Mr. O’Malley has.

People who disagree with Mr. O’Malley have pointed out that he infrequently debated his challenger for governor in Maryland. And they note the number of sanctioned debates is the same as in the 2008 race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

But there were more than a dozen unsanctioned debates and forums back then. This time, the candidates could be excluded from the sanctioned debates if they take part in ones that are not approved by the national committee.

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/12/d-n-c-officer-says-she-was-disinvited-from-debate-after-calling-for-more-of-them/?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

DNC Vice Chair: Wasserman Schultz "Saying Things That Aren't True," Told Me Stop Calling For More Debates
Posted on October 13, 2015

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), vice-chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, talks to NBC's Andrea Mitchell about DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz telling her not to come to the first Democratic presidential debate in Las Vegas.

 "I was on your network, MSNBC, talking on Meet the Press Daily about how we do need more debates," Gabbard said. "The same thing that I have been saying now for several weeks. And the very next day got a message saying that if I'm going to continue talking about that, that I shouldn't go to the debate."

 "It's not surprising to me that she is saying things that aren't true," Gabbard added.

 Wasserman Schultz disputes this is the case, saying Gabbard "chose not to come because I guess she can't."

 Andrea Mitchell asked Gabbard if she will stay at the DNC in her leadership position.

 "You just called her a liar for all intents and purposes," Mitchell said.

ANDREA MITCHELL: Congresswoman, what happened here? [Wasserman Schultz] says that it's not the case that you were not told you couldn't come, that she simply wanted you to stop discussing the debate structure and discuss the issues.

 REP. TULSI GABBARD (D-HI): Good morning, Andrea. Aloha from Hawaii. I can't say much more than to say that that's just not true. I was on your network, MSNBC, talking on Meet the Press Daily about how we do need more debates. The same thing that I have been saying now for several weeks. And the very next day got a message saying that if I'm going to continue talking about that, that I shouldn't go to the debate. It's not surprising to me that she is saying things that aren't true.

 About a month ago, shortly after I called for more debates, the chairwoman said publicly that she had communicated and consulted with vice chairs and officers of the DNC prior to making her decision, both about the number of debates as well as this retribution policy of the exclusivity clause.

 The fact is, there was no communication or no consultation with the vice chairs and officers, of which I am one, so it's unfortunate that she continues to say things that aren't true but what I would like to focus on is the issue of democracy, the issue of freedom of speech which is really the core principle here in my call for more debates and in my call to get rid of this retribution policy that punishes these very serious presidential candidates from going out and engaging the American people across the country in different forums and different debates if they do so outside of the six DNC-sanctioned debates.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/10/13/dnc_vice_chair_wasserman_schultz_saying_things_that_arent_true_told_me_stop_calling_for_more_debates.html

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #372 on: October 23, 2015, 10:07:15 AM »
Campus paper budget yanked in dust-up over ‘Black Lives Matter’ op-ed


The Wesleyan Argus student newspaper is displayed Thursday, Sept. 24, 2015, on the campus of Wesleyan University in Middletown, Conn. The student government for the liberal arts school is weighing a petition to strip The Argus of funding after some objected to an opinion piece it published on the Black Lives Matter movement.  (AP Photo/Michael Melia)

By Valerie Richardson
The Washington Times
Tuesday, October 20, 2015

The Wesleyan University student government has voted to slash funding for the school newspaper following widespread criticism over an op-ed criticizing the Black Lives Matter movement.

The resolution, passed Sunday by a vote of 27-0 by the Wesleyan Student Assembly, cuts the $30,000 annual budget for The Wesleyan Argus in half and redistributes it among the campus’ five publications through the creation of 20 work-study positions in student media.

Junior Alex Garcia, who introduced the proposal, said the resolution was aimed at reducing paper waste and attracting “students of all backgrounds into media,” but the effort was widely viewed as an act of retaliation against the 147-year-old campus newspaper.

“Questioning ‘Black Lives Matter’ costs student paper $17K,” said conservative website Campus Reform in a headline.

Wesleyan President Michael S. Roth issued a statement Monday warning that “any decision about student publications made in the wake of a controversial op-ed should be understood with real caution.”

Mr. Roth added in a Tuesday post on Twitter: “I believe students will realize it’s a big mistake to cut newspaper funding, and they can find ways to support alternative publications.”

The uproar on the Middletown, Connecticut, campus was touched off by sophomore Bryan Stascavage’s Sept. 15 opinion piece headlined “Why Black Lives Matter Isn’t What You Think,” in which he sympathized with some of the movement’s goals but criticized it for “the vilification and denigration of the police force.”

Two days later, the newspaper issued an apology, saying the article contained “flaws,” and promised to run a “Black Out Issue” written only by “students of color.” Even so, the damage was done.

Students launched a petition campaign accusing the newspaper of failing to “provide a safe space for the voices of students of color” and calling for a boycott, along with demands that the newspaper staff complete “social justice/diversity” training and reserve front-page space for “marginalized groups/voices.”

“I know change will take time, but by passing this proposal we can’t say we didn’t try to make the concrete structural changes necessary to start addressing the problem of diversity and inclusion in publications,” said Mr. Garcia in an online video on behalf of the resolution.

The Argus editorial staff had urged the student government to vote down the resolution, saying that the editors had participated in “Social Justice Education Training,” and that “we are in the process of developing a new Editor of Equity and Inclusion position, as well as new outreach programs.”

“These initiatives can’t transform The Argus right away, but transformation takes time,” said the editorial. “This is where the resolution fails: It is reactionary and therefore disregards its broader implications.”

Other students and alumni criticized the newspaper for what they described as caving to political pressure.

“As a former editor on the Argus, I am troubled by this apology,” said Rebecca Schiff, class of 2001, in a comment on the newspaper’s website. “You work on a newspaper. It’s a dinky, barely readable newspaper, but it’s still a newspaper. Reporters and editors have fought for the freedom to say what they want in many countries, including ours.

“You don’t need to apologize if people disagree with an op-ed that you print,” she said. “Apologies like this reflect a totalitarian culture that you must fight. I say this as a left-winger who strongly supports Black Lives Matter.”

The Argus publishes twice a week with a paper distribution of 3,000 copies, which would be reduced to 2,400 copies under the resolution.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/20/wesleyan-students-slash-campus-newspaper-budget-af/?page=all

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #373 on: October 27, 2015, 10:10:02 AM »
Cornell University Kicks Jesse Watters Off Campus for Asking About Liberal Bias
Published October 26, 2015

Fox Nation:

Jesse Watters crashed Cornell University to test students on their liberal “indoctrination” after a report claimed that 96 percent of Cornell professors donated to Democrats. However, in the middle of the regular “Watters’ World” questioning, Jesse was kicked off the campus because Cornell media relations had not grant him permission to interview students.

“We ask that you don’t interview students on campus,” Melissa Osgood, Cornell’s deputy director of media relations said.

“Cornell doesn’t have a problem with Fox News, does it?” Watters asked.

“Absolutely not,” Osgood said.

After Watters asked repeatedly, even the senior director of Cornell media relations would not budge, saying that Fox News could not interview students “on campus” and that he would send Watters a statement.

Still, before Watters' ejection, he did get some questions in to some students.
 

Jesse: What’s the vibe on campus?

“A very diverse campus – a bunch of different people from a bunch of different backgrounds.”

Jesse: It’s not that diverse, because according to this report, 96 percent of the donations from faculty here went to Democrats.

“What’s wrong with that?”

 
Jesse: Do you ever feel the professors are pushing a political agenda here?

“I’ve got friends who are liberal arts majors –  they write a paper and they bring up a conservative viewpoint, they won’t get a good grade.”

“If I want an A, I tailor my paper to how the professor leans.”

 
Jesse: 95 percent is kinda high.

“It’s really high.”
 
Jesse: Your brain is a sponge right now, and I’m worried that these teachers are starting to have a chilling effect.

“Uh…”


Jesse: I’m going to give you a test to see if you’ve been indoctrinated and how bad it is. Do you think we should build a wall on the Southern border to protect against the illegal alien invasion?

[laughter]

“The invasion…”

“Make it out of ice.”

Jesse: That’s not very smart from a Cornell student.

“Well, it’s because I’m indoctrinated, so I know nothing.”

Jesse: So you’d be okay with Guatemalans coming into your dorm room and sleeping on your floor?

“Okay, no.”

Jesse: What is the national debt right now?

“200 million.”

Jesse: 18 Trillion. Professors aren’t tell you the truth.

“Maybe not.”

 
Jesse: What do you think about Hillary Clinton?

“After the whole email scandal, I’ve lost a lot of trust in her.”
 

Jesse: Do you trust Hillary?

“Yes.”

Jesse: Then why did she lie about the Benghazi attacks being about a video when she knew it was about a terrorist attack?

“Huh…”

“I don’t think that she was lying at all to the American public.”


Jesse: Sanders – you feelin’ the Bern?

“I feel like Hillary will give him the burn.”

 
O’Reilly’s Take:

O'Reilly: "They hated you."

Jesse: They did.

O'Reilly: "There's no doubt about it. Did the guy tell you why you couldn't shoot?"

Jesse: Finally I got a statement. It didn't say why I couldn't shoot, it just says Cornell does not consider a person's political stance in its hiring practices.

O'Reilly: "You didn't ask them anything about that."

Jesse: Maybe they should if 96% are Democrats.

O'Reilly: "Don't they know they looked 18 times worse not having you question?"

Jesse: Maybe after they hire some conservative professors, they can hire a new PR team.

O'Reilly: "They told me the real reason they didn't want you on campus."

Jesse: What was that?

O'Reilly: "You had mittens...That offended almost everybody."

http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/10/26/cornell-university-kicks-jesse-watters-campus-asking-about-liberal-bias

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63707
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: More Liberal Censorship
« Reply #374 on: November 09, 2015, 02:47:54 PM »
I have no words.   :-\

Yale’s Halloween Advice Stokes a Racially Charged Debate
By LIAM STACK
NOV. 8, 2015

Weeks of simmering racial tension at Yale University boiled over in recent days into a debate over whether the administration was sensitive enough to concerns about Halloween costumes seen as culturally offensive, students and adminstrators said.

Peter Salovey, the president of Yale, said he had been left “deeply troubled” by a meeting he held with students of color last week who were “in great distress.” Many said they did not believe the university was attuned to the needs of minority students.

“The experiences they shared went beyond the incidents of the last few days,” he said in a statement. “Their concerns and cries for help made clear that some students find life on our campus profoundly difficult.”

James Ramsey, lower right, the University of Louisville president, and his wife, Jane, upper left, hosted a Halloween party in Louisville, Ky. The University of Louisville has apologized after the photo showing Ramsey among university staff members dressed in stereotypical Mexican costumes was posted online.

The debate over Halloween costumes began late last month when the university’s Intercultural Affairs Committee sent an email to the student body asking students to avoid wearing “culturally unaware and insensitive” costumes that could offend minority students. It specifically advised them to steer clear of outfits that included elements like feathered headdresses, turbans or blackface.

Students in front of the Sterling Memorial Library at Yale University. Credit Christopher Capozziello for The New York Times 

In response, Erika Christakis, a faculty member and an administrator at a student residence, wrote an email to students living in her residence hall on behalf of those she described as “frustrated” by the official advice on Halloween costumes. Students should be able to wear whatever they want, she wrote, even if they end up offending people.

An early childhood educator, she asked whether blond toddlers should be barred from being dressed as African-American or Asian characters from Disney films.

“Is there no room anymore for a child or young person to be a little bit obnoxious … a little bit inappropriate or provocative or, yes, offensive?” she wrote. “American universities were once a safe space not only for maturation but also for a certain regressive, or even transgressive, experience; increasingly, it seems, they have become places of censure and prohibition.”

Ms. Christakis’s email touched on a long-running debate over the balance between upholding free speech and protecting students from hurt feelings or personal offense. It also provoked a firestorm of condemnation from Yale students, hundreds of whom signed an open letter criticizing her argument that “free speech and the ability to tolerate offence” should take precedence over other considerations.

“To ask marginalized students to throw away their enjoyment of a holiday, in order to expend emotional, mental, and physical energy to explain why something is offensive, is — offensive,” the letter said. “To be a student of color on Yale’s campus is to exist in a space that was not created for you.”

Ms. Christakis’s email also led to at least one heated encounter on campus between her husband, Nicholas Christakis, a faculty member who works in the same residential college, and a large group of students who demanded that he apologize for the beliefs expressed by him and his wife, which they said failed to create a “safe space” for them.

When he was unwilling to do so, the students angrily cursed and yelled at him, according to a video posted to YouTube by a free speech group critical of the debate. On Sunday it had been viewed over 450,000 times.

“You should step down!” one student shouted at Mr. Christakis, while demanding between expletives to know why Yale had hired him in the first place. “It is not about creating an intellectual space! It is not! Do you understand that? It is about creating a home here!”

“You’re supposed to be our advocate!” another student yelled.

“You are a poor steward of this community!” the first student said before turning and walking away. “You should not sleep at night! You are disgusting.”

The debate over Halloween costumes comes at a time of escalating racial tension at college campuses across the United States. Last month, the president of the University of Louisville apologized to students after he and over a dozen friends were pictured wearing ponchos, sombreros and bushy mustaches with maracas in their hands as part of Mexican-themed Halloween costumes. And on Sunday, dozens of black football players at the University of Missouri vowed to boycott school athletic activities over the university’s handling of racial incidents unless its president resigned.

The debate has erupted against an increasingly tense racial background at Yale. The campus has seen a long-running debate over a residential college named in honor of John C. Calhoun, a 19th-century South Carolina politician, outspoken white supremacist and member of the Yale class of 1804. His name continues to adorn its graceful Gothic halls.

And one week ago a black undergraduate accused a fraternity, Sigma Alpha Epsilon, of denying her entrance to a “white girls only” party on the basis of her race, an allegation that the fraternity denies. Jonathan Holloway, the dean of Yale College, said that his office took the accusation seriously and was investigating.

In an email sent to the student body on Thursday, Mr. Holloway said that he was “fully in support” of the request that Yale students avoid culturally insensitive Halloween costumes and that he regretted the sense among some minority students that Yale had “a poisonous atmosphere.”

“We need always to be dedicated to fashioning a community that is mindful of the many traditions that make us who we are,” he wrote. “Remember that Yale belongs to all of you, and you all deserve the right to enjoy the good of this place, without worry, without threats, and without intimidation.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/09/nyregion/yale-culturally-insensitive-halloween-costumes-free-speech.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0