Oklahoma banned students could sue the college and win big

[Redfish]

This is an example of an item contained in a sample student enrollment contract:


3. I understand that the school may terminate my enrollment if I fail to comply with attendance, academic, and financial requirements or if I fail to abide by established standards of conduct, as outlined in the school catalog. While enrolled in the school, I understand that I must maintain satisfactory academic progress as described in the school catalog and that my financial obligation to the school must be paid in full before a certificate may be awarded.

...I'm guessing OU students sign on to similar compliance requirements when they choose to enroll at the school.

thats meaningless unless you show us the "standards of conduct" that are mentioned.

 

[Redfish]

The idea that when you're a student you have the right to say anything you want, any time, under any circumstances,

and be protected from any consequences is so absurd that it's hard to believe anyone could even think that.

I don't think anyone is entertaining that idea.

Maybe you should have bothered to read the OP:

"Free speech could have been violated a right granted to every citizen no matter what they say..."

The issue is whether OU had the right to expell them. SAE was perfectly justified in shutting down the chapter, but the actions of OU are a totally different issue.

The school quoted creating a "hostile environment"

Is threatening other students with lynching hostile?

which individuals were threatened by something that happened on a bus that no one would have seen but for the video? Is this kinda like the video that caused the murders in Benghazi in your small mind?

 

[hangover]

Hate speech is like yelling "fire!" in a movie theater when there isn't one....It's illegal.
Do you think colleges should allow the KKK and neo-nazis to have fraternities?

They allow black organizations.

They allow young republican organizations too.....until they do what SAE did.

Being black and being Republican are way different things why is it that the left always want to conjoin the two?

BWAH HA HA HA HA!

 

[LordBrownTrout]

So should a rap song with the lyrics "kill ******" be banned on campus?

Only african americans can sing songs about killing ******, smacking their *****, beating the pigs.

 

[Freewill]

Maybe you should have bothered to read the OP:

"Free speech could have been violated a right granted to every citizen no matter what they say..."

The issue is whether OU had the right to expell them. SAE was perfectly justified in shutting down the chapter, but the actions of OU are a totally different issue.

Is there anything any group could say that you would think that the school should act upon? What if this bus were returning from a KKK midnight cross burning, would the school be able to then act upon that situation? You and I both know there are limits to what a person can say, I don't need to bring up yelling fire in a movie theater.

Do you agree that a school, or anyone else, has the right to refuse services? Ever?

A government institution which is what a University is classified as CANNOT prohibit free speech. Period.

What is going on you moron is that you want to this PUBLIC university to be a PRIVATE university SO BAD so you can have a POINT, but it's NOT going to happen. STOP TROLLING.

NO, what I said was that as soon as they threaten people they have crossed the line. What is it you don't understand? The University is trying to protect its image. If they allowed racist THREATS to stand then that would indicate they support those racist THREATS, no matter how benign the threats. The separation is action verses thought. In other words, I can condemn a movie theater all I want, every day if want. But to go into that theater and shout fire could result in harm. Thus that speech is limited. And in reality the first amendment was intended for speech against the government, not to protect speech that hurt or incited violence.

Do you agree or disagree that a company, university or individual has the right to express their standards and beliefs and enforce those standards and beliefs as long as they are enforced equally? I am really not sure I see the difference you are trying to make between public and private.

Does the song constitute a credible threat? I doubt it. The song was not sung at or towards Black students nor does it seem that the frat members would actualy linch a student.

I agree, totally benign, but a threat none the less and unless the university supports such threats they have to act.

What it is, is a mindset. In other words OU has standards and beliefs that they should be able to enforce as long as they are enforced equally. What OU is saying, in my opinion, is that they do not support such statements no matter how unlikely they are to be acted upon.

 

[Redfish]

If there wasn't a code or rule being violated, then the college just censored free speech and on top of it slandered these students reputation by publicizing this situation in the way that they did, and potentially did financial harm to them.

It's a "public" university. Free speech could have been violated a right granted to every citizen no matter what they say under article 1 of the constitution.

They were expelled, according to David Boren, the OU President, for violating school rules, which forbid students from creating a hostile environment for other students.

hostile environment inside a bus???? Were there blacks on the bus?

 

[Liminal]

A genius? Oh I get it now, pretty funny, sarcasm, good one. You seem to have forgotten that there is no such thing as free speech at a formal event of an officially sanctioned organization. They are bound by rules of conduct, ethics and behavior.

By the way there fraternity might have been rightfully shut down. However, the college went further, it expelled them.

The national fraternity would have been quick to act, but it's obvious that the university wanted to get out in front before the situation spun out of control. Too much bad press about universities protecting the wrong people already.

And this has anything to do with my post how And this thread for that matter how?

I think they should consider using the Affluenza defense, they're white, privileged, racist, superficial and stupid, it would be the perfect defense.

You called them people white fellow racist hypocrite.

Anybody else dumb enough to argue against me on this?

I have no idea what this incoherent word jumble means.

 

[Redfish]

The issue is whether OU had the right to expell them. SAE was perfectly justified in shutting down the chapter, but the actions of OU are a totally different issue.

Is there anything any group could say that you would think that the school should act upon? What if this bus were returning from a KKK midnight cross burning, would the school be able to then act upon that situation? You and I both know there are limits to what a person can say, I don't need to bring up yelling fire in a movie theater.

Do you agree that a school, or anyone else, has the right to refuse services? Ever?

A government institution which is what a University is classified as CANNOT prohibit free speech. Period.

What is going on you moron is that you want to this PUBLIC university to be a PRIVATE university SO BAD so you can have a POINT, but it's NOT going to happen. STOP TROLLING.

NO, what I said was that as soon as they threaten people they have crossed the line. What is it you don't understand? The University is trying to protect its image. If they allowed racist THREATS to stand then that would indicate they support those racist THREATS, no matter how benign the threats. The separation is action verses thought. In other words, I can condemn a movie theater all I want, every day if want. But to go into that theater and shout fire could result in harm. Thus that speech is limited. And in reality the first amendment was intended for speech against the government, not to protect speech that hurt or incited violence.

Do you agree or disagree that a company, university or individual has the right to express their standards and beliefs and enforce those standards and beliefs as long as they are enforced equally? I am really not sure I see the difference you are trying to make between public and private.

Does the song constitute a credible threat? I doubt it. The song was not sung at or towards Black students nor does it seem that the frat members would actualy linch a student.

I agree, totally benign, but a threat none the less and unless the university supports such threats they have to act.

What it is, is a mindset. In other words OU has standards and beliefs that they should be able to enforce as long as they are enforced equally. What OU is saying, in my opinion, is that they do not support such statements no matter how unlikely they are to be acted upon.

so you advocate punishing thoughts and opinions?

 

[Freewill]

I don't think anyone is entertaining that idea.

My position is that the government and its agents cannot restrict or punish speech based solely on content. SAE was perfectly justified in shutting down the chapter, but the University would not have been.

and thats the point, either we have free speech or we don't. If what you say offends someone, tough shit. Lots of stuff said by the left offends me, but I would fight for their right to say it.

who got kicked out of school for rioting in Ferguson and screaming "kill the cops" " kill ******" ? No one.

of course most of the rioters were not in any school to get kicked out of.

In my opinion it is the school's choice to refuse service. The students have the right to say what they want but there may be a price to pay for that right.

What I look for is equality in enforcement, which I do not see.

exactly, would the media blitz be the same if it was a black fraternity, chanting about not having any white members?

Maybe, I don't know, but I do believe the reaction of the school and the left wing would be quite different.

it would not have even made the news. there are black fraternities, jewish fraternities, etc. Should they be forced to have white and Christian members?

No, in my opinion, no one should be forced to do anything that is against their standards or beliefs,as long as those standards and beliefs are equally applied. But the black or Jewish frats should not be allowed to discriminate any more so then white frats.

 

[Redfish]

The bigots on this thread are like the SAE member that was expelled for singing the "N" word, and then claiming he isn't a racist.

is being a racist illegal? If so, why isn't Sharpton in jail?

 

[Carla_Danger]

They practiced their free speech, and now they are paying the consequences of their free speech.

Indeed, Je suis Charlie.

Or were you talking about something else?

.

When you violate school rules you pay the consequences. So sad.

 

[Liminal]

Ah. No wonder.
I don't have a TV. That's for morons. You're gonna have to break a sweat and essplain yourself.
It's prolly gonna be one of the reasons I don't have TV in the first place.

By far your worst post here on usmb. I said I'm the last poster you'd want to debate on this site because I have the biggest balls and I'm very unpredictable And a genius.

Even the blacks on Hannity said free speech was violated And potential lawsuits should be filed by these students against the university. Hannity was destroyed on fox tonight.

A genius? Oh I get it now, pretty funny, sarcasm, good one. You seem to have forgotten that there is no such thing as free speech at a formal event of an officially sanctioned organization. They are bound by rules of conduct, ethics and behavior.

By the way there fraternity might have been rightfully shut down. However, the college went further, it expelled them.

The national fraternity would have been quick to act, but it's obvious that the university wanted to get out in front before the situation spun out of control. Too much bad press about universities protecting the wrong people already.

And this has anything to do with my post how And this thread for that matter how?

Completely unconvincing avoidance, must be your genius at work again.

 

[Redfish]

and thats the point, either we have free speech or we don't. If what you say offends someone, tough shit. Lots of stuff said by the left offends me, but I would fight for their right to say it.

who got kicked out of school for rioting in Ferguson and screaming "kill the cops" " kill ******" ? No one.

of course most of the rioters were not in any school to get kicked out of.

In my opinion it is the school's choice to refuse service. The students have the right to say what they want but there may be a price to pay for that right.

What I look for is equality in enforcement, which I do not see.

exactly, would the media blitz be the same if it was a black fraternity, chanting about not having any white members?

Maybe, I don't know, but I do believe the reaction of the school and the left wing would be quite different.

it would not have even made the news. there are black fraternities, jewish fraternities, etc. Should they be forced to have white and Christian members?

No, in my opinion, no one should be forced to do anything that is against their standards or beliefs,as long as those standards and beliefs are equally applied. But the black or Jewish frats should not be allowed to discriminate any more so then white frats.

so you think that black and jewish frats should be forced to accept whites and Christians?

 

[Carla_Danger]

OU basically just shut down free speech.

They practiced their free speech, and now they are paying the consequences of their free speech.

Got you down as another for limitations on speech. Thanks.

No one is limiting free speech, you doofus. Do you not understand the First Amendment? First Amendment rights means the Government shall not infringe upon citizens right to say and write what they want. It does NOT protect citizens against penalties for harming reputations, or from being punished for insulting others. The First Amendment will not save your job, or save you from getting kicked out of school over racial slurs.

Ahhh, but you're down with the govt squashing the rights of a baker in colorado. Scurry along. You've just outed yourself.

That business owner had to obtain a state license, idiot.

 

[Liminal]

A genius? Oh I get it now, pretty funny, sarcasm, good one. You seem to have forgotten that there is no such thing as free speech at a formal event of an officially sanctioned organization. They are bound by rules of conduct, ethics and behavior.

By the way there fraternity might have been rightfully shut down. However, the college went further, it expelled them.

The national fraternity would have been quick to act, but it's obvious that the university wanted to get out in front before the situation spun out of control. Too much bad press about universities protecting the wrong people already.

And this has anything to do with my post how And this thread for that matter how?

I think they should consider using the Affluenza defense, they're white, privileged, racist, superficial and stupid, it would be the perfect defense.

Which according to the constitution EVERY American has a legal right to be and say. Even blacks can do it to whites or he'll even the mexicans they say are stealing their jobs. Lol. Game. Set. Match. Moron. Lol

You are apparently a very small man, why else would you feel the need to tell people all about your incredible genius.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The idea that when you're a student you have the right to say anything you want, any time, under any circumstances,

and be protected from any consequences is so absurd that it's hard to believe anyone could even think that.

I don't think anyone is entertaining that idea.

Maybe you should have bothered to read the OP:

"Free speech could have been violated a right granted to every citizen no matter what they say..."

The issue is whether OU had the right to expell them. SAE was perfectly justified in shutting down the chapter, but the actions of OU are a totally different issue.

Is there anything any group could say that you would think that the school should act upon? What if this bus were returning from a KKK midnight cross burning, would the school be able to then act upon that situation? You and I both know there are limits to what a person can say, I don't need to bring up yelling fire in a movie theater.

Do you agree that a school, or anyone else, has the right to refuse services? Ever?

A government institution which is what a University is classified as CANNOT prohibit free speech. Period.

What is going on you moron is that you want to this PUBLIC university to be a PRIVATE university SO BAD so you can have a POINT, but it's NOT going to happen. STOP TROLLING.

You're making a circular argument. A university may not be able to prohibit free speech, but not all speech qualifies as protected free speech.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Everybody wanting their 15 seconds of fame on Facebook utube worldstar is not making society any better. Person could just as easily presented the video to the admin and let them deal with it in private. Discretion is a dying trait.

 

[Freewill]

Is there anything any group could say that you would think that the school should act upon? What if this bus were returning from a KKK midnight cross burning, would the school be able to then act upon that situation? You and I both know there are limits to what a person can say, I don't need to bring up yelling fire in a movie theater.

Do you agree that a school, or anyone else, has the right to refuse services? Ever?

A government institution which is what a University is classified as CANNOT prohibit free speech. Period.

What is going on you moron is that you want to this PUBLIC university to be a PRIVATE university SO BAD so you can have a POINT, but it's NOT going to happen. STOP TROLLING.

NO, what I said was that as soon as they threaten people they have crossed the line. What is it you don't understand? The University is trying to protect its image. If they allowed racist THREATS to stand then that would indicate they support those racist THREATS, no matter how benign the threats. The separation is action verses thought. In other words, I can condemn a movie theater all I want, every day if want. But to go into that theater and shout fire could result in harm. Thus that speech is limited. And in reality the first amendment was intended for speech against the government, not to protect speech that hurt or incited violence.

Do you agree or disagree that a company, university or individual has the right to express their standards and beliefs and enforce those standards and beliefs as long as they are enforced equally? I am really not sure I see the difference you are trying to make between public and private.

Does the song constitute a credible threat? I doubt it. The song was not sung at or towards Black students nor does it seem that the frat members would actualy linch a student.

I agree, totally benign, but a threat none the less and unless the university supports such threats they have to act.

What it is, is a mindset. In other words OU has standards and beliefs that they should be able to enforce as long as they are enforced equally. What OU is saying, in my opinion, is that they do not support such statements no matter how unlikely they are to be acted upon.

so you advocate punishing thoughts and opinions?

Nope, never even implied as much. I am for people, universities and corporation having standards and beliefs and being able to act upon those standards and beliefs as long as it is done equally. I would think that in almost any setting singing about hanging someone because of the color of their skin would, or should, be unacceptable, no matter how benign. Isn't it time that we the people did something about the racial divide since Obama seems to just wish to drive a wedge?

So if a bus load of blacks were found to be signing about killing ****** I would expect the Universtity to act in the very same way.

 

[Redfish]

They practiced their free speech, and now they are paying the consequences of their free speech.

Indeed, Je suis Charlie.

Or were you talking about something else?

.

When you violate school rules you pay the consequences. So sad.

which rules did they violate by singing stupid racist song on a closed bus? When you sing in the shower should someone make sure that your song doesn't offend someone?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I don't think anyone is entertaining that idea.

My position is that the government and its agents cannot restrict or punish speech based solely on content. SAE was perfectly justified in shutting down the chapter, but the University would not have been.

and thats the point, either we have free speech or we don't. If what you say offends someone, tough shit. Lots of stuff said by the left offends me, but I would fight for their right to say it.

who got kicked out of school for rioting in Ferguson and screaming "kill the cops" " kill ******" ? No one.

of course most of the rioters were not in any school to get kicked out of.

In my opinion it is the school's choice to refuse service. The students have the right to say what they want but there may be a price to pay for that right.

What I look for is equality in enforcement, which I do not see.

They however cannot no matter what use what the student says as grounds to expel them. Period. Public universities are bound by the 1st amendment in the bill of rights in the Constitution.

Private universities aren't.

So a student in a class who decides to call his black teacher/professor Mr. N***** at every opportunity CANNOT be disciplined in any way?

Of course he can...for his behavior in disrupting class.

Not according to the OP.