White college fraternity in Oklahoma shut down for overt racism

[Asclepias]

The Rabbi melting down over his defense of racist idiots. 'twas ever thus w/ that shit stain

I don't think he is defending them so much as he is defending their right to be assholes

No one is taking their right to be assholes.

 

[The Rabbi]

Ok you want to argue semantics, laws, regulations whatever.........
Until they are applied equally they are still just a joke no matter what you call them.

What law/regulation/whatever is not being applied equally?

1A of the Constituioin

When you are hired for a Job, you agree to terms of your employment, so you may not use racial or sexual speech.

Same applies to fraternities when you sign their contract to be a member.

If you want free speech don't agree to terms of employment or fraternity etc etc......

The two arent remotely comparable. And no job requires you to give up rights to free speech away from the job place.

Every job would fire you for the same activity

Nope.
Next

 

[The Rabbi]

The Rabbi melting down over his defense of racist idiots. 'twas ever thus w/ that shit stain

You have a funny way of saying "winning the argument." Is English not your native language?

 

[The Rabbi]

The Rabbi melting down over his defense of racist idiots. 'twas ever thus w/ that shit stain

I don't think he is defending them so much as he is defending their right to be assholes

Subtlety isnt the strong point of these mental midgets.

 

[Asclepias]

The Rabbi melting down over his defense of racist idiots. 'twas ever thus w/ that shit stain

I don't think he is defending them so much as he is defending their right to be assholes

Subtlety isnt the strong point of these mental midgets.

Determining the difference between a right and a consequence isnt a strong point of yours.

 

[BluePhantom]

The Rabbi melting down over his defense of racist idiots. 'twas ever thus w/ that shit stain

I don't think he is defending them so much as he is defending their right to be assholes

No one is taking their right to be assholes.

I am not so sure that is the case. Being expelled from a state run, public institution for singing a racist song seems to me to be punishment from a government institution for speaking their mind. As I have been saying, I imagine the courts will sort it out if it comes to that, but I think there is an argument that their first amendment rights have been violated.

 

[BluePhantom]

The Rabbi melting down over his defense of racist idiots. 'twas ever thus w/ that shit stain

I don't think he is defending them so much as he is defending their right to be assholes

Subtlety isnt the strong point of these mental midgets.

Determining the difference between a right and a consequence isnt a strong point of yours.

There should be consequences but they should come from the private sector. SAE national is a private organization and they pulled their charter. These kids will, and should be branded, and will face public scorn and be ostracized by the OU community. Let them walk to class and endure that scorn. Society will take care of it. No need for the government to get involved if it runs the risk of a violation of constitutional rights.

 

[Dot Com]

wonder what The Rabbi would say if they sang a song about his people like that?

 

[Asclepias]

The Rabbi melting down over his defense of racist idiots. 'twas ever thus w/ that shit stain

I don't think he is defending them so much as he is defending their right to be assholes

No one is taking their right to be assholes.

I am not so sure that is the case. Being expelled from a state run, public institution for singing a racist song seems to me to be punishment from a government institution for speaking their mind. As I have been saying, I imagine the courts will sort it out if it comes to that, but I think there is an argument that their first amendment rights have been violated.

They can still sing their racists songs which is my point.

 

[Asclepias]

The Rabbi melting down over his defense of racist idiots. 'twas ever thus w/ that shit stain

I don't think he is defending them so much as he is defending their right to be assholes

Subtlety isnt the strong point of these mental midgets.

Determining the difference between a right and a consequence isnt a strong point of yours.

There should be consequences but they should come from the private sector. SAE national is a private organization and they pulled their charter. These kids will, and should be branded, and will face public scorn and be ostracized by the OU community. Let them walk to class and endure that scorn. Society will take care of it. No need for the government to get involved if it runs the risk of a violation of constitutional rights.

Creating a hostile environment intentionally or unintentionally cannot be tolerated on campus. We have too many white school shooters as proof of that.

 

[Dot Com]

Red State MURICA is STILL cringe worthy after all these years.

 

[The Rabbi]

wonder what The Rabbi would say if they sang a song about his people like that?

They were jerk but they have every right to be jerks.
Too bad for you.

 

[BluePhantom]

The Rabbi melting down over his defense of racist idiots. 'twas ever thus w/ that shit stain

I don't think he is defending them so much as he is defending their right to be assholes

Subtlety isnt the strong point of these mental midgets.

Determining the difference between a right and a consequence isnt a strong point of yours.

There should be consequences but they should come from the private sector. SAE national is a private organization and they pulled their charter. These kids will, and should be branded, and will face public scorn and be ostracized by the OU community. Let them walk to class and endure that scorn. Society will take care of it. No need for the government to get involved if it runs the risk of a violation of constitutional rights.

Creating a hostile environment intentionally or unintentionally cannot be tolerated on campus. We have too many white school shooters as proof of that.

Creating trouble at school is not exclusive to the white community. Nice try though. Again, I think the courts will decide whether it was a hostile environment or not. If it was off campus (which I believe it was) I don't see where the university has any right to take action aside from dissolving the fraternity (and I think the only reason why they could legally do that is because they own the building).

 

[The Rabbi]

I don't think he is defending them so much as he is defending their right to be assholes

Subtlety isnt the strong point of these mental midgets.

Determining the difference between a right and a consequence isnt a strong point of yours.

There should be consequences but they should come from the private sector. SAE national is a private organization and they pulled their charter. These kids will, and should be branded, and will face public scorn and be ostracized by the OU community. Let them walk to class and endure that scorn. Society will take care of it. No need for the government to get involved if it runs the risk of a violation of constitutional rights.

Creating a hostile environment intentionally or unintentionally cannot be tolerated on campus. We have too many white school shooters as proof of that.

Creating trouble at school is not exclusive to the white community. Nice try though. Again, I think the courts will decide whether it was a hostile environment or not. If it was off campus (which I believe it was) I don't see where the university has any right to take action aside from dissolving the fraternity (and I think the only reason why they could legally do that is because they own the building).

They didnt create any trouble. It was a private event. If some asshole hadnt filmed it and spread it around this wouldnt be an issue.

 

[Asclepias]

I don't think he is defending them so much as he is defending their right to be assholes

Subtlety isnt the strong point of these mental midgets.

Determining the difference between a right and a consequence isnt a strong point of yours.

There should be consequences but they should come from the private sector. SAE national is a private organization and they pulled their charter. These kids will, and should be branded, and will face public scorn and be ostracized by the OU community. Let them walk to class and endure that scorn. Society will take care of it. No need for the government to get involved if it runs the risk of a violation of constitutional rights.

Creating a hostile environment intentionally or unintentionally cannot be tolerated on campus. We have too many white school shooters as proof of that.

Creating trouble at school is not exclusive to the white community. Nice try though. Again, I think the courts will decide whether it was a hostile environment or not. If it was off campus (which I believe it was) I don't see where the university has any right to take action aside from dissolving the fraternity (and I think the only reason why they could legally do that is because they own the building).

Thats not the point. The point is that white racists have a history of doing such things. For a fraternity of white kids to sing songs encouraging the lychings of Blacks creates a hostile environment on campus. Doesnt much matter where they did this. They reside on campus.

 

[rightwinger]

What law/regulation/whatever is not being applied equally?

1A of the Constituioin

When you are hired for a Job, you agree to terms of your employment, so you may not use racial or sexual speech.

Same applies to fraternities when you sign their contract to be a member.

If you want free speech don't agree to terms of employment or fraternity etc etc......

The two arent remotely comparable. And no job requires you to give up rights to free speech away from the job place.

Every job would fire you for the same activity

Nope.
Next

There is not a company in this country that would allow those little assholes to continue working for them

Where ya been the last 50 years Rabbi?

 

[BluePhantom]

Subtlety isnt the strong point of these mental midgets.

Determining the difference between a right and a consequence isnt a strong point of yours.

There should be consequences but they should come from the private sector. SAE national is a private organization and they pulled their charter. These kids will, and should be branded, and will face public scorn and be ostracized by the OU community. Let them walk to class and endure that scorn. Society will take care of it. No need for the government to get involved if it runs the risk of a violation of constitutional rights.

Creating a hostile environment intentionally or unintentionally cannot be tolerated on campus. We have too many white school shooters as proof of that.

Creating trouble at school is not exclusive to the white community. Nice try though. Again, I think the courts will decide whether it was a hostile environment or not. If it was off campus (which I believe it was) I don't see where the university has any right to take action aside from dissolving the fraternity (and I think the only reason why they could legally do that is because they own the building).

Thats not the point. The point is that white racists have a history of doing such things. For a fraternity of white kids to sing songs encouraging the lychings of Blacks creates a hostile environment on campus. Doesnt much matter where they did this. They reside on campus.

So do black racists. So do Hispanic racists. Want to see some big time racism, go visit Japan. Look we are all starting to talk in circles so, interesting as the discussion has been, I am about done here. Here's my prediction. In the coming days we will see constitutional scholars weigh in on this. Some will say OU can expel them and some will say they can't. Some lawyer or organization will see this as an opportunity to make a name for themselves and they will press a case and the courts will sort it out.

I think I have made my position clear that I do not condone the actions of the SAEs, but society should be left to sort it out instead of a government institution because that is opening what I believe to be a very dangerous door. If you disagree, I respect your opinion. No worries at all. I am not sure what else I have to add to this discussion

 

[The Rabbi]

1A of the Constituioin

When you are hired for a Job, you agree to terms of your employment, so you may not use racial or sexual speech.

Same applies to fraternities when you sign their contract to be a member.

If you want free speech don't agree to terms of employment or fraternity etc etc......

The two arent remotely comparable. And no job requires you to give up rights to free speech away from the job place.

Every job would fire you for the same activity

Nope.
Next

There is not a company in this country that would allow those little assholes to continue working for them

Where ya been the last 50 years Rabbi?

Mere assertion fallacy.
Rabbi Rules!

 

[Asclepias]

Determining the difference between a right and a consequence isnt a strong point of yours.

There should be consequences but they should come from the private sector. SAE national is a private organization and they pulled their charter. These kids will, and should be branded, and will face public scorn and be ostracized by the OU community. Let them walk to class and endure that scorn. Society will take care of it. No need for the government to get involved if it runs the risk of a violation of constitutional rights.

Creating a hostile environment intentionally or unintentionally cannot be tolerated on campus. We have too many white school shooters as proof of that.

Creating trouble at school is not exclusive to the white community. Nice try though. Again, I think the courts will decide whether it was a hostile environment or not. If it was off campus (which I believe it was) I don't see where the university has any right to take action aside from dissolving the fraternity (and I think the only reason why they could legally do that is because they own the building).

Thats not the point. The point is that white racists have a history of doing such things. For a fraternity of white kids to sing songs encouraging the lychings of Blacks creates a hostile environment on campus. Doesnt much matter where they did this. They reside on campus.

So do black racists. So do Hispanic racists. Want to see some big time racism, go visit Japan. Look we are all starting to talk in circles so, interesting as the discussion has been, I am about done here. Here's my prediction. In the coming days we will see constitutional scholars weigh in on this. Some will say OU can expel them and some will say they can't. Some lawyer or organization will see this as an opportunity to make a name for themselves and they will press a case and the courts will sort it out.

I think I have made my position clear that I do not condone the actions of the SAEs, but society should be left to sort it out instead of a government institution because that is opening what I believe to be a very dangerous door. If you disagree, I respect your opinion. No worries at all. I am not sure what else I have to add to this discussion

I disagree. The vast majority of school shooters are white racists. Encouraging racism towards Blacks while living on a public school campus is unacceptable to me. My tax dollars may be supporting these pricks. We are not in Japan. We are talking about right here in the good ole US of A. I'm not much interested in what constitutional scholars have to say to be honest. I know lots of attorneys and I agree that someone will attempt to make a name for themselves but they will lose the case while getting paid as donations pour in for their legal fund. The students will be right back where they started. Expelled.

I dont think this is dangerous. It sets a needed precedence that just because you have free speech it doesnt mean you get to be an asshole with impunity.

 

[Dot Com]

wonder what The Rabbi would say if they sang a song about his people like that?

They were jerk but they have every right to be jerks.
Too bad for you.

So you're black? Is that what you're saying?