There Will Never Be A N****r At SAE!

Page 5 of 16 [ 244 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 16 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

13 Mar 2015, 10:13 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Dox47 wrote:

Last I checked, there wasn't any golden rule on the books, but the 1st amendment still applies.

The first amendment applies to the government, not to private organizations that have set rules about acceptable speech and behavior.

1st amendment applies to the people, and their national right, and it cannot be taken away arbitrarily by some private organization or even a public university.

Actually, people get fired all the time because the businesses they work for don't like the kind of things they say, and for the most part, the courts don't do a thing about it when people complain their freedom of speech has been violated.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

13 Mar 2015, 10:25 pm

Do you honestly believe you can say to your boss at work, "you know boss, I am getting sick of the work you unload on me. Either stay away from me with your work or you can hang from the highest tree!" and still keep your job?

wowiexist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Nov 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 660
Location: Dallas, TX

13 Mar 2015, 10:36 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:

wowiexist wrote:

You can complain about the issues of racial profiling and the stereotypes about black people. However there is only one way to actually get rid of the stereotypes and profiles and that is to prove they aren't true. Police target blacks more because blacks commit more crimes. Even if every police officer in the country were black it wouldn't change anything. Blacks would still be targeted alot more by police because they are statistically more of a danger than any other race. Complaining about racism isn't going to make the problems go away, and I personally think all of these protests are going to have unintended consequences like an increase in crime and more police getting shot and things like that.

So do you know the two men that engaged in this chant and expelled? It is true, this chant's been in the OU chapter of SAE for at least three years now. You talk like you are angry the chant was even recorded but if you are going to say something, then people have the right to hear what you are saying unless it is known you are wanting it to be kept confidential and this doesn't appear to be the case. Part of freedom of speech means to owning up what you say. It's childish to think you can just say what you want and not have to own your words in any way.

I read a statement from the OU quarterback Trevor Knight. He is pretty much taking a leadership role here and he is showing wisdom in the matter. You should read what he has to say and listen to him.

I don't know what I said that made you think I was angry about it. I wasn't really even talking about this incident as much as the police brutality issue. But no I am not angry that it was recorded.

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

13 Mar 2015, 11:42 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

Dox47 wrote:

Last I checked, there wasn't any golden rule on the books, but the 1st amendment still applies.

The first amendment applies to the government, not to private organizations that have set rules about acceptable speech and behavior.

It's a public university, it applies.

_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

13 Mar 2015, 11:53 pm

Dox47 wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Dox47 wrote:

Last I checked, there wasn't any golden rule on the books, but the 1st amendment still applies.

The first amendment applies to the government, not to private organizations that have set rules about acceptable speech and behavior.

It's a public university, it applies.

That's actually a valid point I hadn't considered. Still doesn't change the fact that they're a bunch of racist pricks.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

14 Mar 2015, 12:01 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

The law is gray (i.e., open to different interpretations), so sometimes you win when you should lose, and vice-versa. So, I don't disagree with you. However, legally, you have not lost your 1st amendment rights just because you can cite some 'freedom of speech' cases in which someone probably should of won, but did not, or probably should of lost, but did not. It cuts both ways.

The experts cited prior stated that they don't believe this is a case in which an exception applies. Racist speech / Hate speech can be protected by the first amendment. We saw that with the protection rights for the "GOD HATES FAGS" church case.

'Freedom of speech' has exceptions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta ... exceptions

"Restrictions that are based on people's reactions to words include both instances of a complete exception, and cases of diminished protection. Speech that involves incitement, false statements of fact, obscenity, child pornography, threats, and speech owned by others are all completely exempt from First Amendment protections. Commercial advertising receives diminished, but not eliminated, protection".

This leaves us with impression that these kids free speech rights were violated.

wowiexist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Nov 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 660
Location: Dallas, TX

14 Mar 2015, 12:04 am

Dox47 wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Dox47 wrote:

Last I checked, there wasn't any golden rule on the books, but the 1st amendment still applies.

The first amendment applies to the government, not to private organizations that have set rules about acceptable speech and behavior.

It's a public university, it applies.

This is true to an extent, but you have to take into consideration that the university has a responsibility to created a positive environment for its students, so it has a right to use its discretion on removing anything that would disrupt that. A person has individual rights to the extent that they do not use those rights to negatively affect someone else, like that saying "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins."

LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

14 Mar 2015, 12:29 am

wowiexist wrote:

This is true to an extent, but you have to take into consideration that the university has a responsibility to created a positive environment for its students, so it has a right to use its discretion on removing anything that would disrupt that. A person has individual rights to the extent that they do not use those rights to negatively affect someone else, like that saying "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins."

No one is safe if you allow arbitrary "discretion".

I can justify kicking everyone out of school.

- SLOBS are disruptive to fashion sense people.
- Muslims are disruptive to Christians.
- NERDS are annoying the party-going types
- And the famous "Too many Asians in the library" "hate speech" lady needs to go
...

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

14 Mar 2015, 12:32 am

Dox47 wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Dox47 wrote:

Last I checked, there wasn't any golden rule on the books, but the 1st amendment still applies.

The first amendment applies to the government, not to private organizations that have set rules about acceptable speech and behavior.

It's a public university, it applies.

I am pretty sure the university has policies prohibiting discrimination based on a person's race and it applies to housing. Saying a black person cannot ever be a part of SAE is against the university's policies of not discriminating based on a person's race. So, it's not just mere freedom of speech. They are saying they won't let blacks into that chapter of Sigma Alpha Epsilon. Now please, put the info into reality instead of just talking about freedom of speech and the constitution in a theoretical way. For one thing, this is not about freedom of speech. It is about discrimination based on someone's race.

This is NOT about freedom of speech, it is about the culture present in this particular chapter and how it resembles a hate group more than a fraternity and the University will not endorse or support hate groups in any way. It is about the culture present and promoted, apparently by the alumni. They are creating and supporting a culture of hate in the fraternity. SAE called it a cancer. Look at how they got Stephen Jones, of all people, to represent them. He has the reputation of being Tim McVeigh's attorney and most around here hate Tim McVeigh so there ya go.

AND, furthermore, the national fraternity seems to know all about this chapter in Norman. They are aware it's been cancerous for at least three years. From what they have said, they appear to have been aware of the problem before the video surfaced. So, this seems to be a festering event and finally had some light thrown on it. Someone finally addressed it and it's about time.

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

14 Mar 2015, 1:14 am

This is what it says on the SAE website about their True Gentleman mission statement:

The True Gentleman is the man whose conduct proceeds from good will and an acute sense of propriety, and whose self-control is equal to all emergencies; who does not make the poor man conscious of his poverty, the obscure man of his obscurity, or any man of his inferiority or deformity; who is himself humbled if necessity compels him to humble another; who does not flatter wealth, cringe before power, or boast of his own possessions or achievements; who speaks with frankness but always with sincerity and sympathy; whose deed follows his word; who thinks of the rights and feelings of others, rather than his own; and who appears well in any company, a man with whom honor is sacred and virtue safe.

wowiexist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Nov 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 660
Location: Dallas, TX

14 Mar 2015, 1:25 am

As far as it being a public university it is also paid for by taxpayer funds. If it allows negative behavior then people's tax money is going to support those behaviors. It seems to me like if it was a private college they would be more able to say if you don't like what we say just ignore us. But since it is a public university people are forced to support it through their tax money.

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

14 Mar 2015, 1:44 am

wowiexist wrote:

I am not 100% sure but it does look like the housing for this particular fraternity was provided through the University. It looks more like a dorm than an actual house and some of the frat and sorority houses across the street from OU are really nice and look like large, fancy houses but this one looks dormish.

heavenlyabyss
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Sep 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,393

14 Mar 2015, 5:09 am

I think this goes beyond freedom of speech since an entire race is being excluded from the fraternity. There's a difference between making some random stupid comment (I can just randomly string some letters together and say something incredibly insensitive at random if I had enough time) and organized discrimination.

Having said that I don't think the two kids should have been expelled. Probably better ways to deal with the situation.

GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

14 Mar 2015, 10:11 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

Dox47 wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Dox47 wrote:

Last I checked, there wasn't any golden rule on the books, but the 1st amendment still applies.

The first amendment applies to the government, not to private organizations that have set rules about acceptable speech and behavior.

It's a public university, it applies.

That's actually a valid point I hadn't considered. Still doesn't change the fact that they're a bunch of racist pricks.

Actually, it is not a good point at all.

Let's be clear here. NOBODY is depriving these students of their right to free speech.

These students and this fraternity were sanctioned because of the manner in which they expressed themselves.

Using racial slurs and singing gleefully about murdering people rather than allowing them to join your fraternity is obscene, inflammatory, and therefore not worthy of protection.

What's more, a state university's primary purpose in to educate ALL students regardless of class, race, etc.

Obscene, inflammatory, behavior is disruptive and makes the university's primary purpose impossible. This is why all universities have a code of student conduct. These students clearly violated that code, and that's why they are being punished.

If they feel that strongly about their racism, they are still free to talk about it as much as they like.... However, if they continue to use the word n****r and their speech causes disruptions, or they continue to advocate murder by hanging, I'm betting they'll have more problems... Free speech is not consequence free.

Trying to twist this into a first amendment issue is just asinine.

_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus

LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

14 Mar 2015, 12:35 pm

1. There is no evidence that the expelled kids did any discrimination, so this is not about discrimination.

2. There are "black fraternities", "Hispanic fraternities" ... that tend to be 100% of a race. You can't just assume discrimination. There must be a victim..

3.Just because a member of an all-black fraternity tells his friends "no whites allowed in this fraternity" doesn't mean he is involved in the selection process, and that what he says even true. Words are just words.

4. Discrimination is not hypothetical; it either happened or it didn't.

This all about free speech. They should sue them. It is a travesty to see a so called university shut down free thinking people. Make an example of this school and put them in the law books for the entire country to study.

Last edited by LoveNotHate on 14 Mar 2015, 12:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

14 Mar 2015, 12:35 pm

...and getting back to the point of this thread, modern racism, VOX.COM makes some great points...

Quote:

Racism isn't going to die out with old people

Millennials are a little naive and delusional about race and racism. According to an MTV-sponsored national poll of Americans ages 18 to 24 conducted in 2014, 89 percent said they believed everyone should be treated equally, but only 37 percent said their families ever talked about race. A majority thought of themselves as "postracial."

The vague interest in equality among this young crowd, combined with their lack of sophistication about how white supremacy operates, helps explain things like the annoying racial microaggressions that can make college tough for students of color these days. And their outlook makes the chances look slim that the next generation of leaders will be able to deal with inequality.

Slate's Jamelle Bouie, writing about the poll results, explained:

From these results, it's clear that-like most Americans-millennials see racism as a matter of different treatment, justified by race, that you solve by removing race from the equation. If we ignore skin color in our decisions, then there can't be racism.

The problem is that racism isn't reducible to "different treatment." Since if it is, measures to ameliorate racial inequality-like the Voting Rights Act-would be as "racist" as the policies that necessitated them. No, racism is better understood as white supremacy-anything that furthers a broad hierarchy of racist inequity, where whites possess the greatest share of power, respect, and resources, and blacks the least.

And the magic of white supremacy is that its presence is obscured by the focus on race.

The SAE members' use of the type of aggressive, racist language and sentiments that most people attribute to people their grandparents' age simply piles on to the racial ignorance of their more polite and well-intended peers. And it's another reminder that there's little reason to be hopeful the simple passage of time will diminish prejudice and hostility.

No, racists aren't going to naturally die out and leave the world a better place. New ones are going out into the world every day, and rarely will their conduct be this easy to identify and condemn.

Judging from the typical reactions gotten by posts concerning 'white privilege' (and many of the posts here), I'd say we're doomed. :roll:

_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus

Page 5 of 16 [ 244 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 16 Next

Jump to:

There Will Never Be A N****r At SAE! Post Reply New Topic

There Will Never Be A N****r At SAE!