Univ. of Oklahoma Sooners

[SF1900]

 I don't know the details about hazing but the same principles apply. The policies have to be legally sound.

A school is not strictly a commercial enterprise, contrary to policy adjustments of the past few decades.  "Commercial speech" and "School speech" are differentiated.  Kids chanting on a bus...hmmm...you have to be very careful about limiting speech in these environments regardless of the message I'm not sure I agree with it.  

Agreed, which is why I stated if one wanted to really know, then one should check the policies and procedures dictated by the university about this sort of stuff. That is all I can say on the matter.

[wes]

Racism Of Peace

[Archer77]

Agreed, which is why I stated if one wanted to really know, then one should check the policies and procedures dictated by the university about this sort of stuff. That is all I can say on the matter.

And this is all anyone should say about the issue.  What's happened is only representative of the individuals engaging in these acts and should not be used as a political soapbox to make any other judgments or policies. The students will be punished and life will go on.

[mr.turbo]

Agreed, which is why I stated if one wanted to really know, then one should check the policies and procedures dictated by the university about this sort of stuff. That is all I can say on the matter.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/03/10/racism-fraternity-oklahoma-free-speech-free-marketplace-column/24697041/

 

[Kwon_2]

look white people are inherently racist toward colored people just like colored people are inherently racist toward white people. That's just how it is. We re animal from different races with strenghts and weaknesses and we spend our lives preying on each others for limited ressources. Healthy powerful young people are repulsed, disgusted by ugly, weak, old people. Is it racism?

No, it's our animal nature. No written law is ever going to change any of it. That's just the way it is.

Indeed.

[El Diablo Blanco]

LOL at all the black folk on TV saying how upset and how discussed they are with the video. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA !  Some even wanting the drunk frat boys charged with assault.  LOL!!

They have two more Obama years for sympathy before America moves on from this shit and a President who doesn't give a fuck about them.

[El Diablo Blanco]

What I hate more is the term REVERSE RACISM.  They basically think racism is white hating blacks.  No, its one race hating another.  Reverse racism means not racist.  Fucking idiot media cocks.

[Archer77]

They have two more Obama years for sympathy before America moves on from this shit and a President who doesn't give a fuck about them.

Judging by the 10% unemployment rates for blacks I would argue that Obama doesnt care about them either.  Obama does know how to distract them with purple drank and fried chicken  bread and circuses.

[mr.turbo]

What I hate more is the term REVERSE RACISM.  They basically think racism is white hating blacks.  No, its one race hating another.  Reverse racism means not racist.  Fucking idiot media cocks.

hehe the bizarre intellectual gymnastics required to justify certain positions is funny. It takes a heavily deranged mind to produce this material!

[Thong Maniac]

People should be able to say whatever they want against anyone they want and thats it.Its their right to freedom to freedom of speech.

Lol totally missing the point of argument lol

"Free speech der!"

[SF1900]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/03/10/racism-fraternity-oklahoma-free-speech-free-marketplace-column/24697041/

 

Interesting. Then what was the ground on having them dismissed and making them close down their fraternity? I suspect Univ of Okl may have a lawsuit on their hands.

[mr.turbo]

Interesting. Then what was the ground on having them dismissed and making them close down their fraternity? I suspect Univ of Okl may have a lawsuit on their hands.

The argument from the university president is that they "created a hostile learning environment for others.” I gather there is some appeals process but so far the censorship action seems heavy handed. Did they do an investigation? Indeed, it could turn very out badly for the university depending on how this is resolved. It's really not appropriate to censor students for offensiveness.

[Kwon_2]

[polychronopolous]

Technically I don't know if this one would be considered offensive. I think "negrita" is actually a term of endearment in alot of Latin America countries.

[Kwon_2]

Technically I don't know if this one would be considered offensive. I think "negrita" is actually a term of endearment in alot of Latin America countries.

I know AnalogicHalo used to call his babymama that 

[BB]

.

is not please by the turn of this thread so soon after black history month.

[SF1900]

The argument from the university president is that they "created a hostile learning environment for others.” I gather there is some appeals process but so far the censorship action seems heavy handed. Did they do an investigation? Indeed, it could turn very out badly for the university depending on how this is resolved. It's really not appropriate to censor students for offensiveness.

But look at it both ways. It will turn out VERY bad if the president doesn't take action. Lets say he decided not to punish the students at all. This may lead to a decrease in enrollment, people may not offer endowments, funding may go down, depending on who is providing funding or endowment. On the other hand, censoring students may lead to negative consequences as well. However, at the end of the day, the president is probably playing it safe. Less repercussions associated with booting these dumb students.

[mr.turbo]

But look at it both ways. It will turn out VERY bad if the president doesn't take action. Lets say he decided not to punish the students at all. This may lead to a decrease in enrollment, people may not offer endowments, funding may go down, depending on who is providing funding or endowment. On the other hand, censoring students may lead to negative consequences as well. However, at the end of the day, the president is probably playing it safe. Less repercussions associated with booting these dumb students.

That's all well and good but unfortunately Eric is right that "freedom of speech is a right in the U S of A" so the president is legally obliged to do his job and take care of business without trampling on students rights.  It's not a popular cause to defend so it get reduced to a defence purely on principle. Of course nobody has any principles these days so these kids will get crushed and everybody will move along.

[SF1900]

That's all well and good but unfortunately Eric is right that "freedom of speech is a right in the U S of A" so the president is legally obliged to do his job and take care of business without trampling on students rights.  It's not a popular cause to defend so it get reduced to a defence purely on principle. Of course nobody has any principles these days so these kids will get crushed and everybody will move along.

Well, yes, it appears that there was no outright policy against this sort of behavior.

However, as I stated previously, colleges/universities may limit free speech. They have done this with hazing rituals (it is banned in many universities/colleges, and you may be dismissed from school. This is written in many universities handbook. It was already passed by Pennsylvania), that may involve one student verbally abusing another student. The difference is that hazing involves one student directly affecting another student. However, one can argue that this still limits freedom, since you're limiting the freedom of an adult to be hazed, if they choose to be a part of it.

I wonder if there are any policies against direct racism? Like, are students allowed to say racial slurs on school campus while walking around or in class?

[SF1900]

That's all well and good but unfortunately Eric is right that "freedom of speech is a right in the U S of A" so the president is legally obliged to do his job and take care of business without trampling on students rights.  It's not a popular cause to defend so it get reduced to a defence purely on principle. Of course nobody has any principles these days so these kids will get crushed and everybody will move along.

Some schools have limited free speech. For example:

NORTH PARK UNIVERSITY

Racial and Ethnic Harassment Specifically Defined

North Park aspires to be a multi-cultural community of learning. In order to make this goal a reality, we need to develop a sensitivity to, and an educated awareness of, each other's cultures, nationalities and ethnic differences. Demeaning or harassing comments or acts, which are racially or ethnically motivated, are contrary to the spirit and goals of the North Park community.

Racist and/or discriminatory conduct includes verbal or physical behavior that explicitly or implicitly demeans the race, color, ethnic ancestry or national origin of an individual or individuals. Examples of racist or discriminatory behavior include, but are not limited to:

§ Verbal assaults based upon ethnicity that demeans the color, culture or history of any person or persons,
and/or that perpetuate stereotypical beliefs about and attitudes toward minority groups. Such verbal
assaults may include name-calling, racial slurs, slang references and jokes.
§ Nonverbal behavior that demeans the color, culture or history of any person or persons and/or that
perpetuates stereotypical beliefs about and attitudes toward minority groups. Such behaviors may include
gestures, portrayals, graffiti or acts of exclusion.
§ Intimidation through threats of force or violence or threats of interference with an individual's education, work
or other activity.
§ Physical contact or assault for racist and discriminatory reasons.

CONSEQUENCES

The institution will take prompt and appropriate action when complaints of harassment (racial or sexual) are registered, including appropriate disciplinary action up to dismissal, if the complaint is substantiated and such discipline is deemed necessary.

[bradistani]

http://news.yahoo.com/ou-fraternity-close-racist-video-posted-online-040106571.html


 

catchy tune

[mr.turbo]

Some schools have limited free speech. For example:

NORTH PARK UNIVERSITY

Racial and Ethnic Harassment Specifically Defined

North Park aspires to be a multi-cultural community of learning. In order to make this goal a reality, we need to develop a sensitivity to, and an educated awareness of, each other's cultures, nationalities and ethnic differences. Demeaning or harassing comments or acts, which are racially or ethnically motivated, are contrary to the spirit and goals of the North Park community.

Racist and/or discriminatory conduct includes verbal or physical behavior that explicitly or implicitly demeans the race, color, ethnic ancestry or national origin of an individual or individuals. Examples of racist or discriminatory behavior include, but are not limited to:

§ Verbal assaults based upon ethnicity that demeans the color, culture or history of any person or persons,
and/or that perpetuate stereotypical beliefs about and attitudes toward minority groups. Such verbal
assaults may include name-calling, racial slurs, slang references and jokes.
§ Nonverbal behavior that demeans the color, culture or history of any person or persons and/or that
perpetuates stereotypical beliefs about and attitudes toward minority groups. Such behaviors may include
gestures, portrayals, graffiti or acts of exclusion.
§ Intimidation through threats of force or violence or threats of interference with an individual's education, work
or other activity.
§ Physical contact or assault for racist and discriminatory reasons.

CONSEQUENCES

The institution will take prompt and appropriate action when complaints of harassment (racial or sexual) are registered, including appropriate disciplinary action up to dismissal, if the complaint is substantiated and such discipline is deemed necessary.

The relevant question is do these policies pass constitutional muster? ie: first amendment. For example; the city of Ferguson was found to have a pattern and practice (aka policy) that was unconstitutional. An unconstitutional policy is more offensive than a one-off infringement.

The US of A has a very strong record for speech protection but it's cases like these that can erode that tradition.

haters have the right to hate. it's really the intellectual dishonesty that the most offensive. Oh ya ban the intellectual poseurs way before the racists.  

[SF1900]

The relevant question is do these policies pass constitutional muster? ie: first amendment. For example; the city of Ferguson was found to have a pattern and practice (aka policy) that was unconstitutional. An unconstitutional policy is more offensive than a one-off infringement.

The US of A has a very strong record for speech protection but it's cases like these that can erode that tradition.

haters have the right to hate. it's really the intellectual dishonesty that the most offensive. Oh ya ban the intellectual poseurs way before the racists.  

I am sure the universities/colleges have the best lawyers at hand, helping them write appropriate policies/procedures that will not be sidetracked by the argument, "Free speech."

If a student engaged in any of that behavior, the university has every right at North Park to dismiss the student. Whether or not this erodes freedom of speech is beyond the point. Even if it does, the university has the right to dismiss people that break that policy.

I am not saying I agree or disagree with this. What I am saying is that universities often due implement policies that limit free speech.

[mr.turbo]

I am sure the universities/colleges have the best lawyers at hand, helping them write appropriate policies/procedures that will not be sidetracked by the argument, "Free speech."

If a student engaged in any of that behavior, the university has every right at North Park to dismiss the student. Whether or not this erodes freedom of speech is beyond the point. Even if it does, the university has the right to dismiss people that break that policy.

I am not saying I agree or disagree with this. What I am saying is that universities often due implement policies that limit free speech.

There is a difference between a "right" and a "practice".  The former is justified legally the other latter is subject to legal judgement. We can observe institutional behavior and catalogue it till the cows come home but that doesn't make it anything special.

[Voice of Doom]

I don't see what the problem is. Doesn't America still have free speech 

Of course.  You're free to say almost anything.  But that speech comes with consequences.  Getting kicked out was a consequence for their speech.