Expelled Oklahoma U fraternity to sue university, possibly President Boren

[Plasmaball]

Public Universities have been held to the same standard of speech protection that government has.

No, they don't. again, no one is throwing them in jail for their racist rants. They are just saying, "We don't want you going to school here because you'll probably get your asses kicked."

Hey, whatever happened to the "Party of Personal Responsibility". YOu know, the one that says people need to own up to their actions?

Public Universities have been held to the same standard of speech protection that government has.

No, they don't. again, no one is throwing them in jail for their racist rants. They are just saying, "We don't want you going to school here because you'll probably get your asses kicked."

Hey, whatever happened to the "Party of Personal Responsibility". YOu know, the one that says people need to own up to their actions?

Personal responsibility only applies when they are going after the left. These people will throw everyone else under the bus to avoid it.

 

[Plasmaball]

That's not a government agencies call to make. I know you don't give a shit about process (there's that fascist thing again) but government has rules it has to follow, i.e. the constitution.

They had a totally fair hearing. they had evidence, they asked the guys if they said that shit and they bounced their asses.

Works for me.

Ah, kanagroo justice, the favorite of the fascist.

not really.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Racists found the limits of free speech

Used to be they could pull that shit anywhere

Oh! So racist speech isn't protected by the first ammendment!

They are protected, they're not going to jail. They still have to follow the schools code of conduct.

Tell me, hypocrite Leftist, if homosexual dating were a violation of the school's code of conduct, which side of the issue would you be on?

I thought so.

The University should not be allowed to discriminate based on sexual orientation, so how exactly would that be in violation of the code of conduct? Do you think there are no gay students attending OU?

 

[JoeMoma]

Your rights end where my feelings begin.

In this case, it was the feelings of an entire university

Sucks being a racist these days doesn't it?

Guess racists don't have 1st ammendment rights. Don't you see the problem here. The first ammendment doesn't only protect speech that we like or agree with, it protects speech that we hate or disagree with.

You have no understanding of the first amendment

It never says there can be no consequences for what you say

Expulsion is one of those consequences

Yes, in fact the First Amendment is all about consequences. In fact, that is the entire point. It protects you from the State abridging your right to free speech, such as in a State institution implementing speech codes and levying punishment upon you for your speech.

I know this and I am not even an American. Your Bill of Rights is still one of the few things I love about your country and admire them for.

Looks like you need a refresher on your own Constitution

Legally, the University doesn't have a leg to stand on.

PAPISH v. UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI CURATORS, 410 U.S. 667 (1973)

Expulsion of student for distributing on campus a publication assertedly containing "indecent speech" proscribed by a bylaw of a state university's Board of Curators held an impermissible violation of her First Amendment free speech rights since the mere dissemination of ideas on a state university campus cannot be proscribed in the name of "conventions of decency."

Certiorari granted; 464 F.2d 136, reversed.

FindLaw Cases and Codes

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

So the expulsions were not actions taken by a government entity against the students because their message (speech) was deemed inappropriate?
All we have to do is call the expulsions "consequencies" to not have any first ammendment issues! Thanks for schooling us on the 1st ammendment!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Your rights end where my feelings begin.

In this case, it was the feelings of an entire university

Sucks being a racist these days doesn't it?

Guess racists don't have 1st ammendment rights. Don't you see the problem here. The first ammendment doesn't only protect speech that we like or agree with, it protects speech that we hate or disagree with.

You have no understanding of the first amendment

It never says there can be no consequences for what you say

Expulsion is one of those consequences

Yes, in fact the First Amendment is all about consequences. In fact, that is the entire point. It protects you from the State abridging your right to free speech, such as in a State institution implementing speech codes and levying punishment upon you for your speech.

I know this and I am not even an American. Your Bill of Rights is still one of the few things I love about your country and admire them for.

Looks like you need a refresher on your own Constitution

Legally, the University doesn't have a leg to stand on.

PAPISH v. UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI CURATORS, 410 U.S. 667 (1973)

Expulsion of student for distributing on campus a publication assertedly containing "indecent speech" proscribed by a bylaw of a state university's Board of Curators held an impermissible violation of her First Amendment free speech rights since the mere dissemination of ideas on a state university campus cannot be proscribed in the name of "conventions of decency."

Certiorari granted; 464 F.2d 136, reversed.

FindLaw Cases and Codes

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

Correct.

That one might be subject to adverse actions in the context of private society as a consequence of his speech has nothing whatsoever to do with 'free speech,' as the First Amendment concerns solely the relationship between government and those governed, not the relationship between private persons and/or organizations.

And yet again: the OU students were expelled as a consequence of their conduct, not their speech, no matter how much some on the right attempt to propagate the lie that they were expelled due to their speech.

The racist students remain at liberty to practice their racism, to engage in racist speech whenever they so desire, in any venue they so desire, absent interference by the government, subject to no punitive measures by the government.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

It isn't a free speech issue.

Wrong. That's exactly what it is.

Just like the Duck Dynasty guy or that Fat chick who liked to cook with butter, whatever her name was. It's not a free speech issue if my boss fires me after I call him an asshole.

They weren't employed by the government.

This is a transaction between parties.

One is a government organization which cannot violate the Constitution.

There's no due process issue here.

Read the Fifth Amendment.

These guys were caught on tape chanting racist epitaths, which violates the universities code of conduct. Therefore the university was well within its rights to expell the little racist *****.

The First Amendment isn't there to protect popular speech. It's there to protect unpopular speech, else it wouldn't be needed in the first place.

I've seen plenty of incidents in the past year of anti-Semitic speech right out on public grounds of universities in front of hundreds of students and nothing happened to those instigators.

 

[rightwinger]

In this case, it was the feelings of an entire university

Sucks being a racist these days doesn't it?

Guess racists don't have 1st ammendment rights. Don't you see the problem here. The first ammendment doesn't only protect speech that we like or agree with, it protects speech that we hate or disagree with.

You have no understanding of the first amendment

It never says there can be no consequences for what you say

Expulsion is one of those consequences

Yes, in fact the First Amendment is all about consequences. In fact, that is the entire point. It protects you from the State abridging your right to free speech, such as in a State institution implementing speech codes and levying punishment upon you for your speech.

I know this and I am not even an American. Your Bill of Rights is still one of the few things I love about your country and admire them for.

Looks like you need a refresher on your own Constitution

Legally, the University doesn't have a leg to stand on.

PAPISH v. UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI CURATORS, 410 U.S. 667 (1973)

Expulsion of student for distributing on campus a publication assertedly containing "indecent speech" proscribed by a bylaw of a state university's Board of Curators held an impermissible violation of her First Amendment free speech rights since the mere dissemination of ideas on a state university campus cannot be proscribed in the name of "conventions of decency."

Certiorari granted; 464 F.2d 136, reversed.

FindLaw Cases and Codes

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

So the expulsions were not actions taken by a government entity against the students because their message (speech) was deemed inappropriate?
All we have to do is call the expulsions "consequencies" to not have any first ammendment issues! Thanks for schooling us on the 1st ammendment!

A government entity with established rules and regulations

Stop defending racists....it will get you nowhere

 

[JoeMoma]

In this case, it was the feelings of an entire university

Sucks being a racist these days doesn't it?

Guess racists don't have 1st ammendment rights. Don't you see the problem here. The first ammendment doesn't only protect speech that we like or agree with, it protects speech that we hate or disagree with.

You have no understanding of the first amendment

It never says there can be no consequences for what you say

Expulsion is one of those consequences

Yes, in fact the First Amendment is all about consequences. In fact, that is the entire point. It protects you from the State abridging your right to free speech, such as in a State institution implementing speech codes and levying punishment upon you for your speech.

I know this and I am not even an American. Your Bill of Rights is still one of the few things I love about your country and admire them for.

Looks like you need a refresher on your own Constitution

Legally, the University doesn't have a leg to stand on.

PAPISH v. UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI CURATORS, 410 U.S. 667 (1973)

Expulsion of student for distributing on campus a publication assertedly containing "indecent speech" proscribed by a bylaw of a state university's Board of Curators held an impermissible violation of her First Amendment free speech rights since the mere dissemination of ideas on a state university campus cannot be proscribed in the name of "conventions of decency."

Certiorari granted; 464 F.2d 136, reversed.

FindLaw Cases and Codes

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

Correct.

That one might be subject to adverse actions in the context of private society as a consequence of his speech has nothing whatsoever to do with 'free speech,' as the First Amendment concerns solely the relationship between government and those governed, not the relationship between private persons and/or organizations.

And yet again: the OU students were expelled as a consequence of their conduct, not their speech, no matter how much some on the right attempt to propagate the lie that they were expelled due to their speech.

The racist students remain at liberty to practice their racism, to engage in racist speech whenever they so desire, in any venue they so desire, absent interference by the government, subject to no punitive measures by the government.

They were expelled as a consequence of their conduct, not their speech?
So if everything were the same in the video that got them in trouble except that they were singing "row, row, row your boat" , then they would have still been expelled; after all, they were expelled as a consequence of their conduct, not their speech. REALLY?

The conduct that they got in trouble for was speech. It was there message that was the problem. Different message -- Different outcome.

 

[JoeMoma]

Guess racists don't have 1st ammendment rights. Don't you see the problem here. The first ammendment doesn't only protect speech that we like or agree with, it protects speech that we hate or disagree with.

You have no understanding of the first amendment

It never says there can be no consequences for what you say

Expulsion is one of those consequences

Yes, in fact the First Amendment is all about consequences. In fact, that is the entire point. It protects you from the State abridging your right to free speech, such as in a State institution implementing speech codes and levying punishment upon you for your speech.

I know this and I am not even an American. Your Bill of Rights is still one of the few things I love about your country and admire them for.

Looks like you need a refresher on your own Constitution

Legally, the University doesn't have a leg to stand on.

PAPISH v. UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI CURATORS, 410 U.S. 667 (1973)

Expulsion of student for distributing on campus a publication assertedly containing "indecent speech" proscribed by a bylaw of a state university's Board of Curators held an impermissible violation of her First Amendment free speech rights since the mere dissemination of ideas on a state university campus cannot be proscribed in the name of "conventions of decency."

Certiorari granted; 464 F.2d 136, reversed.

FindLaw Cases and Codes

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

So the expulsions were not actions taken by a government entity against the students because their message (speech) was deemed inappropriate?
All we have to do is call the expulsions "consequencies" to not have any first ammendment issues! Thanks for schooling us on the 1st ammendment!

A government entity with established rules and regulations

Stop defending racists....it will get you nowhere

There's the rub. For many on this thread the race card trumps the 1st ammendment.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Racists found the limits of free speech

Used to be they could pull that shit anywhere

Oh! So racist speech isn't protected by the first ammendment!

They are protected, they're not going to jail. They still have to follow the schools code of conduct.

Tell me, hypocrite Leftist, if homosexual dating were a violation of the school's code of conduct, which side of the issue would you be on?

I thought so.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

Government seeking to single out a particular class of persons for disadvantage motivated solely by who constitutes that class of persons violates the 14th Amendment, having nothing to do with their 'conduct' as gay students.

The OU students were expelled as a consequence of their conduct, not who they are, and not as a consequence of their speech.

 

[PratchettFan]

Racists found the limits of free speech

Used to be they could pull that shit anywhere

Oh! So racist speech isn't protected by the first ammendment!

They are protected, they're not going to jail. They still have to follow the schools code of conduct.

Tell me, hypocrite Leftist, if homosexual dating were a violation of the school's code of conduct, which side of the issue would you be on?

I thought so.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

Government seeking to single out a particular class of persons for disadvantage motivated solely by who constitutes that class of persons violates the 14th Amendment, having nothing to do with their 'conduct' as gay students.

The OU students were expelled as a consequence of their conduct, not who they are, and not as a consequence of their speech.

It was entirely as a consequence of their speech. They were not expelled because of the video but because of what they said on the video.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You have no understanding of the first amendment

It never says there can be no consequences for what you say

Expulsion is one of those consequences

Yes, in fact the First Amendment is all about consequences. In fact, that is the entire point. It protects you from the State abridging your right to free speech, such as in a State institution implementing speech codes and levying punishment upon you for your speech.

I know this and I am not even an American. Your Bill of Rights is still one of the few things I love about your country and admire them for.

Looks like you need a refresher on your own Constitution

Legally, the University doesn't have a leg to stand on.

PAPISH v. UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI CURATORS, 410 U.S. 667 (1973)

Expulsion of student for distributing on campus a publication assertedly containing "indecent speech" proscribed by a bylaw of a state university's Board of Curators held an impermissible violation of her First Amendment free speech rights since the mere dissemination of ideas on a state university campus cannot be proscribed in the name of "conventions of decency."

Certiorari granted; 464 F.2d 136, reversed.

FindLaw Cases and Codes

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

So the expulsions were not actions taken by a government entity against the students because their message (speech) was deemed inappropriate?
All we have to do is call the expulsions "consequencies" to not have any first ammendment issues! Thanks for schooling us on the 1st ammendment!

A government entity with established rules and regulations

Stop defending racists....it will get you nowhere

There's the rub. For many on this thread the race card trumps the 1st ammendment.

There is no such thing as a 'race card,' it's another inane contrivance of the right, like 'political correctness,' or the 'liberal media.'

The problem is many on the right attempt to propagate the lie of a 'race card.'

Indeed, no one seeks to 'trump' the First Amendment, the notion is idiocy, as is the notion that the students' right to 'free speech' was 'violated.'

 

[rightwinger]

You have no understanding of the first amendment

It never says there can be no consequences for what you say

Expulsion is one of those consequences

Yes, in fact the First Amendment is all about consequences. In fact, that is the entire point. It protects you from the State abridging your right to free speech, such as in a State institution implementing speech codes and levying punishment upon you for your speech.

I know this and I am not even an American. Your Bill of Rights is still one of the few things I love about your country and admire them for.

Looks like you need a refresher on your own Constitution

Legally, the University doesn't have a leg to stand on.

PAPISH v. UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI CURATORS, 410 U.S. 667 (1973)

Expulsion of student for distributing on campus a publication assertedly containing "indecent speech" proscribed by a bylaw of a state university's Board of Curators held an impermissible violation of her First Amendment free speech rights since the mere dissemination of ideas on a state university campus cannot be proscribed in the name of "conventions of decency."

Certiorari granted; 464 F.2d 136, reversed.

FindLaw Cases and Codes

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

So the expulsions were not actions taken by a government entity against the students because their message (speech) was deemed inappropriate?
All we have to do is call the expulsions "consequencies" to not have any first ammendment issues! Thanks for schooling us on the 1st ammendment!

A government entity with established rules and regulations

Stop defending racists....it will get you nowhere

There's the rub. For many on this thread the race card trumps the 1st ammendment.

In this case racist behavior got you expelled.
When you attend a university you agree to conform to certain standards of behavior
Celebrating the lynching of n*ggers who want to join your organization does not meet that standard

Why are you defending racists?

 

[PratchettFan]

Yes, in fact the First Amendment is all about consequences. In fact, that is the entire point. It protects you from the State abridging your right to free speech, such as in a State institution implementing speech codes and levying punishment upon you for your speech.

I know this and I am not even an American. Your Bill of Rights is still one of the few things I love about your country and admire them for.

Looks like you need a refresher on your own Constitution

Legally, the University doesn't have a leg to stand on.

FindLaw Cases and Codes

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

So the expulsions were not actions taken by a government entity against the students because their message (speech) was deemed inappropriate?
All we have to do is call the expulsions "consequencies" to not have any first ammendment issues! Thanks for schooling us on the 1st ammendment!

A government entity with established rules and regulations

Stop defending racists....it will get you nowhere

There's the rub. For many on this thread the race card trumps the 1st ammendment.

There is no such thing as a 'race card,' it's another inane contrivance of the right, like 'political correctness,' or the 'liberal media.'

The problem is many on the right attempt to propagate the lie of a 'race card.'

Indeed, no one seeks to 'trump' the First Amendment, the notion is idiocy, as is the notion that the students' right to 'free speech' was 'violated.'

They were expelled because of what they said. The university is a government entity, an arm of the state. Not a private institution. How is that not a violation of their right to free speech?

Let's go over it: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The university, as an extension of government, falls under that prohibition. It doesn't say unless the speech is icky, or insults people, or clearly shows the speaker to be a total twit. If the university can prohibit one kind of speech, no matter how disgusting and idiotic, it can prohibit other kinds of speech as well. The kid on the video was an asshole. As far as I know, the entire frat was a collection of assholes. But assholes have as much right to spew repulsive nonsense as anyone else.

 

[PratchettFan]

Yes, in fact the First Amendment is all about consequences. In fact, that is the entire point. It protects you from the State abridging your right to free speech, such as in a State institution implementing speech codes and levying punishment upon you for your speech.

I know this and I am not even an American. Your Bill of Rights is still one of the few things I love about your country and admire them for.

Looks like you need a refresher on your own Constitution

Legally, the University doesn't have a leg to stand on.

FindLaw Cases and Codes

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

So the expulsions were not actions taken by a government entity against the students because their message (speech) was deemed inappropriate?
All we have to do is call the expulsions "consequencies" to not have any first ammendment issues! Thanks for schooling us on the 1st ammendment!

A government entity with established rules and regulations

Stop defending racists....it will get you nowhere

There's the rub. For many on this thread the race card trumps the 1st ammendment.

In this case racist behavior got you expelled.
When you attend a university you agree to conform to certain standards of behavior
Celebrating the lynching of n*ggers who want to join your organization does not meet that standard

Why are you defending racists?

Because, like it or not, racists have the same rights as everyone else. If you take away their rights, your rights go with it. If you aren't willing to stand up for the rights of people you hate, you don't deserve anyone to stand up for you.

 

[rightwinger]

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

So the expulsions were not actions taken by a government entity against the students because their message (speech) was deemed inappropriate?
All we have to do is call the expulsions "consequencies" to not have any first ammendment issues! Thanks for schooling us on the 1st ammendment!

A government entity with established rules and regulations

Stop defending racists....it will get you nowhere

There's the rub. For many on this thread the race card trumps the 1st ammendment.

In this case racist behavior got you expelled.
When you attend a university you agree to conform to certain standards of behavior
Celebrating the lynching of n*ggers who want to join your organization does not meet that standard

Why are you defending racists?

Because, like it or not, racists have the same rights as everyone else. If you take away their rights, your rights go with it. If you aren't willing to stand up for the rights of people you hate, you don't deserve anyone to stand up for you.

Yes they do

They have the right to be held accountable for their actions, just like everyone else. By everyone except conservatives who will defend to the death the right to scream N*gger

 

[rightwinger]

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

So the expulsions were not actions taken by a government entity against the students because their message (speech) was deemed inappropriate?
All we have to do is call the expulsions "consequencies" to not have any first ammendment issues! Thanks for schooling us on the 1st ammendment!

A government entity with established rules and regulations

Stop defending racists....it will get you nowhere

There's the rub. For many on this thread the race card trumps the 1st ammendment.

There is no such thing as a 'race card,' it's another inane contrivance of the right, like 'political correctness,' or the 'liberal media.'

The problem is many on the right attempt to propagate the lie of a 'race card.'

Indeed, no one seeks to 'trump' the First Amendment, the notion is idiocy, as is the notion that the students' right to 'free speech' was 'violated.'

They were expelled because of what they said. The university is a government entity, an arm of the state. Not a private institution. How is that not a violation of their right to free speech?

Let's go over it: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The university, as an extension of government, falls under that prohibition. It doesn't say unless the speech is icky, or insults people, or clearly shows the speaker to be a total twit. If the university can prohibit one kind of speech, no matter how disgusting and idiotic, it can prohibit other kinds of speech as well. The kid on the video was an asshole. As far as I know, the entire frat was a collection of assholes. But assholes have as much right to spew repulsive nonsense as anyone else.

Still looking for the law that was passed.

 

[PratchettFan]

So the expulsions were not actions taken by a government entity against the students because their message (speech) was deemed inappropriate?
All we have to do is call the expulsions "consequencies" to not have any first ammendment issues! Thanks for schooling us on the 1st ammendment!

A government entity with established rules and regulations

Stop defending racists....it will get you nowhere

There's the rub. For many on this thread the race card trumps the 1st ammendment.

In this case racist behavior got you expelled.
When you attend a university you agree to conform to certain standards of behavior
Celebrating the lynching of n*ggers who want to join your organization does not meet that standard

Why are you defending racists?

Because, like it or not, racists have the same rights as everyone else. If you take away their rights, your rights go with it. If you aren't willing to stand up for the rights of people you hate, you don't deserve anyone to stand up for you.

Yes they do

They have the right to be held accountable for their actions, just like everyone else. By everyone except conservatives who will defend to the death the right to scream N*gger

The big question is, why aren't you willing to defend it?

 

[PratchettFan]

So the expulsions were not actions taken by a government entity against the students because their message (speech) was deemed inappropriate?
All we have to do is call the expulsions "consequencies" to not have any first ammendment issues! Thanks for schooling us on the 1st ammendment!

A government entity with established rules and regulations

Stop defending racists....it will get you nowhere

There's the rub. For many on this thread the race card trumps the 1st ammendment.

There is no such thing as a 'race card,' it's another inane contrivance of the right, like 'political correctness,' or the 'liberal media.'

The problem is many on the right attempt to propagate the lie of a 'race card.'

Indeed, no one seeks to 'trump' the First Amendment, the notion is idiocy, as is the notion that the students' right to 'free speech' was 'violated.'

They were expelled because of what they said. The university is a government entity, an arm of the state. Not a private institution. How is that not a violation of their right to free speech?

Let's go over it: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The university, as an extension of government, falls under that prohibition. It doesn't say unless the speech is icky, or insults people, or clearly shows the speaker to be a total twit. If the university can prohibit one kind of speech, no matter how disgusting and idiotic, it can prohibit other kinds of speech as well. The kid on the video was an asshole. As far as I know, the entire frat was a collection of assholes. But assholes have as much right to spew repulsive nonsense as anyone else.

Still looking for the law that was passed.

It was passed when the Constitution was ratified.

 

[rightwinger]

A government entity with established rules and regulations

Stop defending racists....it will get you nowhere

There's the rub. For many on this thread the race card trumps the 1st ammendment.

In this case racist behavior got you expelled.
When you attend a university you agree to conform to certain standards of behavior
Celebrating the lynching of n*ggers who want to join your organization does not meet that standard

Why are you defending racists?

Because, like it or not, racists have the same rights as everyone else. If you take away their rights, your rights go with it. If you aren't willing to stand up for the rights of people you hate, you don't deserve anyone to stand up for you.

Yes they do

They have the right to be held accountable for their actions, just like everyone else. By everyone except conservatives who will defend to the death the right to scream N*gger

The big question is, why aren't you willing to defend it?

I am under no obligation to defend repulsive behavior or those who are punished because of it