(03-10-2015 07:18 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-10-2015 04:43 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It should be up to the school.

And where does that line get drawn fit?

If this was a private school I might lean towards saying "it's their decision". But its a state school discriminating against constitutionally protected speech which occurred not on the campus.

Sounds like you are defending these idiots.

(03-10-2015 08:28 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(03-10-2015 07:18 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-10-2015 04:43 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It should be up to the school.

And where does that line get drawn fit?

If this was a private school I might lean towards saying "it's their decision". But its a state school discriminating against constitutionally protected speech which occurred not on the campus.

Sounds like you are defending these idiots.

Time to find out



"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your [BLANK]"

(03-10-2015 03:54 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-10-2015 03:26 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-10-2015 02:23 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  I probably would have expelled them. They probably violated some code of student conduct?
But
1) Since this happened off campus and not in the hosue
2) Involved a few people, I would have not shut down the SAE House.

Hold on a second... It happened off campus so SAE is safe but the kids *WHO DID IT OFF CAMPUS* should have been expelled.

If the code of conduct allows for it. Closing down the house was an awful move.

Not sure if serious....

(03-10-2015 10:29 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(03-10-2015 03:54 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-10-2015 03:26 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-10-2015 02:23 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  I probably would have expelled them. They probably violated some code of student conduct?
But
1) Since this happened off campus and not in the hosue
2) Involved a few people, I genhave not shut down the SAE House.

Hold on a second... It happened off campus so SAE is safe but the kids *WHO DID IT OFF CAMPUS* should have been expelled.

If the code of conduct allows for it. Closing down the house was an awful move.

Not sure if serious....

Ah the genius check in.

(03-10-2015 07:18 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-10-2015 04:43 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It should be up to the school.

And where does that line get drawn fit?

If this was a private school I might lean towards saying "it's their decision". But its a state school discriminating against constitutionally protected speech which occurred not on the campus.

*Cough* honor code

Does the honor coade say thaty can't be an ass? Because really they are guilty of being an ass off campus and caused nobody any harm in doing so.

I've waffled over this more times than John Kerry in a presidential election. I determined that yes, they should be expelled if that is the school's choice. You don't have a right to a college education, there is no guaranteed acceptance to OU. You apply and are chosen. While being expelled from a good university is "punishment", no one is telling these kids they can't sing racist songs, their right to free speech is not being squashed. These kids can go on being racist if they want, but not as OU students. Until someone puts them in jail for this sort of stuff, no one is infringing on their 1st amendment rights.

(03-11-2015 07:57 AM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:  I've waffled over this more times than John Kerry in a presidential election. I determined that yes, they should be expelled if that is the school's choice. You don't have a right to a college education, there is no guaranteed acceptance to OU. You apply and are chosen. While being expelled from a good university is "punishment", no one is telling these kids they can't sing racist songs, their right to free speech is not being squashed. These kids can go on being racist if they want, but not as OU students. Until someone puts them in jail for this sort of stuff, no one is infringing on their 1st amendment rights.

Agree.

They have a right to sing racist songs. They don't have a right to go to OU. If one precludes the other, they have nobody to blame but themselves.

The question, I thought, was should they have been expelled... not should OU have the right to expel them.

(03-10-2015 10:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-10-2015 10:29 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(03-10-2015 03:54 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-10-2015 03:26 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-10-2015 02:23 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  I probably would have expelled them. They probably violated some code of student conduct?
But
1) Since this happened off campus and not in the hosue
2) Involved a few people, I genhave not shut down the SAE House.

Hold on a second... It happened off campus so SAE is safe but the kids *WHO DID IT OFF CAMPUS* should have been expelled.

If the code of conduct allows for it. Closing down the house was an awful move.

Not sure if serious....

Ah the genius check in.

"Oh look a poster disagrees with me or at least questions me. Better mock his intelligence". Typical.

(03-11-2015 07:57 AM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:  I've waffled over this more times than John Kerry in a presidential election. I determined that yes, they should be expelled if that is the school's choice. You don't have a right to a college education, there is no guaranteed acceptance to OU. You apply and are chosen. While being expelled from a good university is "punishment", no one is telling these kids they can't sing racist songs, their right to free speech is not being squashed. These kids can go on being racist if they want, but not as OU students. Until someone puts them in jail for this sort of stuff, no one is infringing on their 1st amendment rights.

I err on the side of government agencies and services, whether entitlements or not, should not be subject to thought policing. I would have zero issue with a private school kicking these kids out, I'd even cheer it. But its a dangerous precedent to set when a State Univeristy says "that was so offensive that we are going to expel you".

Remember the Atlanta firefighter who was fired because he wrote a devotional promoting a christian view of marriage for his church study group? This is not a whole lot different.

We are creating a society which goes beyond protecting the basic right of all people. It's now all about (1) getting even with the man and (2) engineering peoples opinions.

(03-11-2015 09:10 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-11-2015 07:57 AM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:  I've waffled over this more times than John Kerry in a presidential election. I determined that yes, they should be expelled if that is the school's choice. You don't have a right to a college education, there is no guaranteed acceptance to OU. You apply and are chosen. While being expelled from a good university is "punishment", no one is telling these kids they can't sing racist songs, their right to free speech is not being squashed. These kids can go on being racist if they want, but not as OU students. Until someone puts them in jail for this sort of stuff, no one is infringing on their 1st amendment rights.

I err on the side of government agencies and services, whether entitlements or not, should not be subject to thought policing. I would have zero issue with a private school kicking these kids out, I'd even cheer it. But its a dangerous precedent to set when a State Univeristy says "that was so offensive that we are going to expel you".

Remember the Atlanta firefighter who was fired because he wrote a devotional promoting a christian view of marriage for his church study group? This is not a whole lot different.

We are creating a society which goes beyond protecting the basic right of all people. It's now all about (1) getting even with the man and (2) engineering peoples opinions.

I look at it like "if you want the government's money, you need to play by the rules put forth by the subsidizing agency". Similar to drug testing welfare recipients.

I didn't come to this conclusion easily though. I went back and forth quite a bit.

I would think the president/chancellor has the right (or duty) to dismiss students that harm the school. What happened damaged OU's reputation.

More disappointed that Joe Mixon is on the team at Okie. He KOed a girl with a punch to her head, all caught on
video.

(03-11-2015 10:12 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  I would think the president/chancellor has the right (or duty) to dismiss students that harm the school. What happened damaged the OU's reputation.

See, I don't think OU's reputation was hurt.. in fact, they closed the fraternity. I don't think anyone except the extremists are saying "see how racist OU is"... it's the SAE frat that's taking the heat.

(03-10-2015 07:18 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-10-2015 04:43 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It should be up to the school.

And where does that line get drawn fit?

If this was a private school I might lean towards saying "it's their decision". But its a state school discriminating against constitutionally protected speech which occurred not on the campus.

What does the standard of conduct say at the school? There are multiple offenses that can get you kicked out of a school, no idea if this is one of them. If they aren't kicked out, chances are their remaining time there will be miserable.

It's pretty much settled constitutional law that schools can't expel students for speech. If the expelled students want back in they will get back in.

FWIW, even Jamelle Bouie of Slate (who definitely can't be accused of being an Uncle Tom) has come out against the expulsion and rash action by the OU president.

If a Muslim student wanted to open up a chapter of al Qaeda at UConn, I would hope my school had the authority to expel him.

(03-11-2015 01:47 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  If a Muslim student wanted to open up a chapter of al Qaeda at UConn, I would hope my school had the authority to expel him.

Comparing a violent terrorist group to offensive racial speech?

(03-11-2015 03:12 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-11-2015 01:47 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  If a Muslim student wanted to open up a chapter of al Qaeda at UConn, I would hope my school had the authority to expel him.

Comparing a violent terrorist group to offensive racial speech?

Ok, so maybe that's not the best example. What about a racist cop who says that his city would be better off if they didn't have all these n------. He can say that all day long (free speech), but that doesn't mean there are no consequences. He could be fired.

Free speech is our most cherished right, but there are often consequences even if the speech was completely legal.