Racist Fraternity at the University of Oklahoma caught on tape.

[paliplaya2010]

So lemme get this straight duke really believes that because they didn't intend to get caught on camera, they shouldn't be punished?

no i think because of the constitution and freedom of speech, they shouldnt be punished.
i also think that because they didnt intend for the public to hear their racist remarks that were made in a private party, in a bus behind closed doors, off campus they should not be blamed for causing the disruption it caused.

i have literally said this at least 10 times

 

[iYen]

 

[fontaine]

He never said that black people integrated into white schools were to blame.

He said the act caused hostility.

YOU GUYS took that as "Wait, so you're saying black people were to blame. Bruh. Closet bigot."

Except he never said that.

Holster your weapons. Damn.

In all honesty doe...

If you look at the previous posts, drawing that line is NOT that much of a reach

 

[mr marcus]

 
It's funny.

People love to start the "free speech" debate when it's pertaining to something like this.

If that was a bus full of people professing their love for and allegiance to ISIS and it led to their expulsion....somehow I don't think "free speech" would be a topic of discussion.

Dwight Howard and Rihanna had to PUBLICLY APOLOGIZE because they asked people to "pray for palestine".

Where were all of you with the "free speech" debate then? Or do we only care about free speech when it's relating to some frat boys singing about how much they hate *******?

preach

 

[paliplaya2010]

Brah I definitely feel the guns a warranted

He is comparing blacks just attending classes (doing nothing else, just trying to attend classes), to dudes chanting about lynching blacks.

He is equating the irrational outrage of racist whites, to the rational outrage of current OU students

If the hostile school environment argument is being used, the you have to point to a specific action the students did to cause the hostility. What did the black students do? Be black? That's the act dude is pointing too.

Even without him placing any blame on them it is still a ridiculous comparisons to make. Do matter how you look at it

i was comparing a hostile environment created does not equal blame. that was the comparison. i have already stated it was a bad example but it still works. although someone created a situation they are not in complete blame for the hostile environment.

the main point i was making is its unconstitutional to punish for speech. twist and turn my word, i used some bad analogies but i still stand behind my original point

 

[sfc415]

i was comparing a hostile environment created does not equal blame. that was the comparison. i have already stated it was a bad example but it still works. although someone created a situation they are not in complete blame for the hostile environment.

the main point i was making is its unconstitutional to punish for speech. twist and turn my word, i used some bad analogies but i still stand behind my original point

This is NOT true

 

[Fong$tarr]

no i think because of the constitution and freedom of speech, they shouldnt be punished.
i also think that because they didnt intend for the public to hear their racist remarks that were made in a private party, in a bus behind closed doors, off campus they should not be blamed for causing the disruption it caused.

i have literally said this at least 10 times

In an odd way, you do have a point. I am not sure if this applies to schools though and I am not legal expert but I know you can't fire someone from a job because of their outside beliefs. So say someone found out I was into devil worship and went to a church every Sunday for that and my boss found out and fired me. I can literally sue the company for discrimination which is an employment practice claim. Of course a lawyer would appeal that case and maybe find the loop hole that a devil worshiper is not suitable for a job and win but still, people have a right to practice what they believe and a company is supposed to abide by that as long as it is not brought to work.

Anyways.......I think the only bad thing about expelling the kids is that they won't really learn to change what they believe. It's almost more constructive to put them into self help seminars or something like that. Expelling them is still right imo.

 

[paliplaya2010]

In all honesty doe...

If you look at the previous posts, drawing that line is NOT that much of a reach

it is a reach tho. my words were misunderstood and i apologized. idk what else is needed from me. does everyone really just want me to say that the punishment is legal? i agree it is deserved, but from my research i still dont believe it is a legal punishment

 

[MVP]

So Donald Sterling should still have the Clippers as well?

I know the NBA is in the private sector.

So as long as nobody intended for the actions to become public, absolves them from any repercussions after it does become public? The fact that it took place of campus is irrelevant if those guys mere presence on campus AFTER the incident causes the hostile environment.

You also have rights not to be infringed upon by other people and particularly in a school environment to have a safe and amicable place to learn.

You keep quoting that Washington Post that says they can't be expelled for the speech, but the school says they were expelled for the environment it created. What are we missing here. Those are two entirely different things.

 

[Kimchi Papi]

It was a poorly thought out comparison. Yes, it did make for a hostile environment but the first black students attending all white schools were a matter of civil/human rights.

Them boys singing that sae song were about abject racism & bigotry using the most heinous imagery of hate crimes in lynching. Just a terrible comparison in trying to make your point.

Is there legal precedent in first amendment rights being violated? Yes. Could this case be different because of Tinker v DesMoines & Title VI? Possibly. It's all contingent on whether these dirt balls fight their expulsions.

Jeez just thinking about the comparison. Christ... One of the most terrible choices I've ever seen on the interwebz....

 

[paliplaya2010]

In an odd way, you do have a point. I am not sure if this applies to schools though and I am not legal expert but I know you can't fire someone from a job because of their outside beliefs. So say someone found out I was into devil worship and went to a church every Sunday for that and my boss found out and fired me. I can literally sue the company for discrimination which is an employment practice claim. Of course a lawyer would appeal that case and maybe find the loop hole that a devil worshiper is not suitable for a job and win but still, people have a right to practice what they believe and a company is supposed to abide by that as long as it is not brought to work.

Anyways.......I think the only bad thing about expelling the kids is that they won't really learn to change what they believe. It's almost more constructive to put them into self help seminars or something like that. Expelling them is still right imo.

Under the First Amendment, though, the government — including the University of Oklahoma — ... whether the offensive speech is racist, religiously bigoted, pro-revolutionary, or expressive of any other viewpoint, however repugnant it might be.

a public institution such as the University of Oklahoma, which takes public money, operates as an arm of the government under the law. under the 1st amendment, you cannot be punished for speech.

 

[paliplaya2010]

It was a poorly thought out comparison. Yes, it did make for a hostile environment but the first black students attending all white schools were a matter of civil/human rights. Them boys singing that sae song were about abject racism & bigotry using the most heinous imagery of hate crimes in lynching. Just a terrible comparison in trying to make your point.

agreed. once again, i apologize if anyone misunderstood my meaning

 

[darthska]

He never said that black people integrated into white schools were to blame.

He said the act caused hostility.

YOU GUYS took that as "Wait, so you're saying black people were to blame. Bruh. Closet bigot."

Except he never said that.

Holster your weapons. Damn.

In all honesty doe...

If you look at the previous posts, drawing that line is NOT that much of a reach

Nah, I get that.

So continue to address what was actually said.

 

[sfc415]

The 1st Amendment does NOT protect all speech. Again, if your speech is seen as inciting and promoting violence , you WILL be punished by the law

 

[delete1234]

Shouldn't have read the comments lol

 

[Fong$tarr]

Under the First Amendment, though, the government — including the University of Oklahoma — ... whether the offensive speech is racist, religiously bigoted, pro-revolutionary, or expressive of any other viewpoint, however repugnant it might be.

a public institution such as the University of Oklahoma, which takes public money, operates as an arm of the government under the law. under the 1st amendment, you cannot be punished for speech.

But if there is a will, there will be a way. That is how the law works. You might not indirectly be punished from free speech but they will get you on other things which can give the same result. The law is definitely not bound to always doing what is right.

 

[gamerg]

The 1st Amendment does NOT protect all speech. Again, if your speech is seen as inciting and promoting violence , you WILL be punished by the law

and also promoting the overthrow of government.

 

[paliplaya2010]

So Donald Sterling should still have the Clippers as well?

I know the NBA is in the private sector.

So as long as nobody intended for the actions to become public, absolves them from any repercussions after it does become public? The fact that it took place of campus is irrelevant if those guys mere presence on campus AFTER the incident causes the hostile environment.

You also have rights not to be infringed upon by other people and particularly in a school environment to have a safe and amicable place to learn.

You keep quoting that Washington Post that says they can't be expelled for the speech, but the school says they were expelled for the environment it created. What are we missing here. Those are two entirely different things.

my argument doesnt apply to a private sector. but i am def more on the fence on that only because he was an owner and they forced him to sell. they should cut ties lol. really screw him over. i think that was the best decision tho. if he was an employee of the nba, a private sector, he should absolutely be fired regardless of how it cam about

 

[moonman818]

The 1st Amendment does NOT protect all speech. Again, if your speech is seen as inciting and promoting violence , you WILL be punished by the law

But it's not promoting violence or threatening because HE feels it was rhetorical.



Can't believe this clown would in anyway compare the plight of a people just wanting equal education to some racist ***** singing racist and violent songs

 

[mr marcus]

The 1st Amendment does NOT protect all speech. Again, if your speech is seen as inciting and promoting violence , you WILL be punished by the law

 

[mr s j king]

paliplaya2010 your probably not a bigot and neither are 50% of people that were on the "hang'em from a tree" bus.
But there is something called an "accessory" and you make yourself one when you attempt to defend the "rights" of hate mongers and people who agree with the senseless murder of innocent people.

 

[sfc415]

But it's not promoting violence or threatening because HE feels it was rhetorical.

It's so absurd to me. Encouraging a mob of white kids to sing "Hang a _____ from a tree" is not violent to this guy

 

[Kimchi Papi]

I have 14 years of hardcore volunteer work in Baltimore City, in the worst neighborhoods on the face of this planet. Ranging from AA/NA work, drug treatment, adult/child literacy, soup kitchens, food banks, & after school programs. If you plan on working in the inner city like you say, you had best not stick your foot in your mouth like you do in here, because it will get you kilt...


Jeez, I still can't get over that comparison...

 

[fontaine]

The 1st Amendment does NOT protect all speech. Again, if your speech is seen as inciting and promoting violence , you WILL be punished by the law

wee-bey.gif


I think that locks up that point.

 

[RustyShackleford]

paliplaya2010 main point seems to be that if there is a knock down drag out lawsuit, the students would win.

And you know what, he is probably right. Most judges will probably view the lynching line as joke, instead of a call to violence

The president nuke these dudes so quickly (which I still believe was the best move) and didn't wait to give them a school hearing or risk a fight on campus (which would lock up the unsafe/hostile environment argument up tight).

Instead the way he played it, leaves OU open for a lawsuit.

Paliplaya though seemed he was more interested in arguing, than presenting his point in the most lucid manner.

And that's why we're at this point