Expelled Oklahoma U fraternity to sue university, possibly President Boren

[martybegan]

Not military discipline, which is why people who enlist in the military have to lose certain rights, but only in certain conditions.
And considering federal employees have a union, you would have a hard time firing one of them for that.

You are comparing apples to the empty hole that is where your brain is supposed to reside.

No, you are trying to use the First Amendment to cover things it doesn't apply to.

It applies in this case. Your disdain for anything in the constitution that you disagree with is well known on this board, as is your propensity to ignore it when it suits you.

 

[JoeB131]

It applies in this case. Your disdain for anything in the constitution that you disagree with is well known on this board, as is your propensity to ignore it when it suits you.

No, it really doesn't.

They had a contract with the university. they violated that contract.

 

[martybegan]

It applies in this case. Your disdain for anything in the constitution that you disagree with is well known on this board, as is your propensity to ignore it when it suits you.

No, it really doesn't.

They had a contract with the university. they violated that contract.

An unconstitutional contract in un-enforceable. I can have a contract that a person voluntarily signed to make them my slave, or a contract to bring booze into a dry county, but since both those acts violate the constitution, they are null and void.

 

[ralfy]

Fraternity apologizes unveils diversity plan to combat racial intolerance - Chicago Tribune

Sigma Alpha Epsilon launches national effort to eliminate racism from its chapters - The Washington Post

Sigma Alpha Epsilon Announces Anti-Discrimination Plan NPR

 

[JoeB131]

An unconstitutional contract in un-enforceable. I can have a contract that a person voluntarily signed to make them my slave, or a contract to bring booze into a dry county, but since both those acts violate the constitution, they are null and void.

okay, guy, the thing is, a bunch of University Lawyers looked a the same COnstitution, and they have a lot more qualifications than your Losertarian ass has, and said, "Yeah, we can bounce this piece of shit!"

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It applies in this case. Your disdain for anything in the constitution that you disagree with is well known on this board, as is your propensity to ignore it when it suits you.

No, it really doesn't.

They had a contract with the university. they violated that contract.

An unconstitutional contract in un-enforceable. I can have a contract that a person voluntarily signed to make them my slave, or a contract to bring booze into a dry county, but since both those acts violate the constitution, they are null and void.

Ignorant nonsense.

This isn't a 'Constitutional issue,' there are no First Amendment 'violations.'

The students were expelled as a consequence of their conduct, not speech, in accordance with school policy, policy the students agreed to follow as a condition of attendance.

 

[martybegan]

An unconstitutional contract in un-enforceable. I can have a contract that a person voluntarily signed to make them my slave, or a contract to bring booze into a dry county, but since both those acts violate the constitution, they are null and void.

okay, guy, the thing is, a bunch of University Lawyers looked a the same COnstitution, and they have a lot more qualifications than your Losertarian ass has, and said, "Yeah, we can bounce this piece of shit!"

And of course lawyers are "always right"

I think the more likely advice was "we can buy these guys off later, but right now if you want to get rid of them we can keep them tied up with procedures for about a year or two"

 

[martybegan]

It applies in this case. Your disdain for anything in the constitution that you disagree with is well known on this board, as is your propensity to ignore it when it suits you.

No, it really doesn't.

They had a contract with the university. they violated that contract.

An unconstitutional contract in un-enforceable. I can have a contract that a person voluntarily signed to make them my slave, or a contract to bring booze into a dry county, but since both those acts violate the constitution, they are null and void.

Ignorant nonsense.

This isn't a 'Constitutional issue,' there are no First Amendment 'violations.'

The students were expelled as a consequence of their conduct, not speech, in accordance with school policy, policy the students agreed to follow as a condition of attendance.

Their conduct WAS speech. it was not fighting words, it was not directed at any particular individual, it wasn't even public.

And any policy they agree on that violates constitutional rights is null on its face.

The mental Olympics you are performing to justify the State punishing speech is saddening.

 

[JoeB131]

And of course lawyers are "always right"

I think the more likely advice was "we can buy these guys off later, but right now if you want to get rid of them we can keep them tied up with procedures for about a year or two"

Or they realized that they could easily bury these two drunken frat boys.

Just get lots of black people on the jury. Heh, heh, heh....

 

[Slyhunter]

It applies in this case. Your disdain for anything in the constitution that you disagree with is well known on this board, as is your propensity to ignore it when it suits you.

No, it really doesn't.

They had a contract with the university. they violated that contract.

So your saying in order to get a college degree they have to be liberals, or pretend to be liberals. That they say anything that a liberal disagrees with they should be expelled?

 

[JoeB131]

So your saying in order to get a college degree they have to be liberals, or pretend to be liberals. That they say anything that a liberal disagrees with they should be expelled?

Uh, no.

In order to get a college degree, you have to follow the rules of the university that you agreed to when you enrolled.

 

[Meathead]

So your saying in order to get a college degree they have to be liberals, or pretend to be liberals. That they say anything that a liberal disagrees with they should be expelled?

Uh, no.

In order to get a college degree, you have to follow the rules of the university that you agreed to when you enrolled.

Really, even your right to free speech? As if you couldn't get any stupider.

 

[JoeB131]

Really, even your right to free speech? As if you couldn't get any stupider.

Isn't a free speech issue. It's an issue of conduct. just like if I diss my boss on Facebook, it's not a free speech issue if he fires me.

 

[Slyhunter]

Really, even your right to free speech? As if you couldn't get any stupider.

Isn't a free speech issue. It's an issue of conduct. just like if I diss my boss on Facebook, it's not a free speech issue if he fires me.

Private vs public not a good example.

 

[JoeB131]

Private vs public not a good example.

You don't think Public employees who aren't in a union can't be fired for saying the wrong thing?

This isn't a free speech issue. These punks signed a contract with the University. Part of that was to not bring disrepute on the university and not to engage in action that makes the university a "hostile learning environment".

 

[martybegan]

And of course lawyers are "always right"

I think the more likely advice was "we can buy these guys off later, but right now if you want to get rid of them we can keep them tied up with procedures for about a year or two"

Or they realized that they could easily bury these two drunken frat boys.

Just get lots of black people on the jury. Heh, heh, heh....

So you are saying black people cannot be objective about the law?

Interesting, you racist fuck.

 

[Slyhunter]

And of course lawyers are "always right"

I think the more likely advice was "we can buy these guys off later, but right now if you want to get rid of them we can keep them tied up with procedures for about a year or two"

Or they realized that they could easily bury these two drunken frat boys.

Just get lots of black people on the jury. Heh, heh, heh....

So you are saying black people cannot be objective about the law?

Interesting, you racist fuck.

Fergerson. Nothing more needs to be said.

 

[JoeB131]

So you are saying black people cannot be objective about the law?

Interesting, you racist fuck.

again, guy, only in your mind is there something about the "law" here.

THis is about entitled punks who acted obnoxiously and don't want to man up and face the music.