Oklahoma banned students could sue the college and win big

[The Rabbi]

I believe a university has the right to evaluate ones character as a criteria for admission....and expulsion.

I may be wrong, but when I was recruited, I was first interviewed by the coaches....but then I had to be interviewed by an admissions committee who were interested to get to know me as a person. Not simply grades and field talent.

That is correct, as a criteria for admission, but once you're admitted, they can't reevaluate and expel you because they're discovering you don't like a certain race or religion. You have to clearly violate their code of conduct, and if it's a public university they're limited.

If universities expelled every student who violated the code of conduct by making lewd jokes, etc etc etc they would be empty of students.

Yup. College is a time for young people to experiment with different things in a free environment, and discover themselves and who they want to be later in life. I bet you half the kids on that bus weren't racists but just wanted to be there to feel what it was like being around openly racist kids. Maybe some of them even sang along for the thrill of it, without actually agreeing.

I doubt there were ANY racist kids there. People just acting out in inappropriate ways because they could. The frat has black members, you know.

 

[hazlnut]

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.

Bullshit.

You don't know jack shit about the law.

This is an idiotic post.

 

[Roudy]

I believe a university has the right to evaluate ones character as a criteria for admission....and expulsion.

I may be wrong, but when I was recruited, I was first interviewed by the coaches....but then I had to be interviewed by an admissions committee who were interested to get to know me as a person. Not simply grades and field talent.

That is correct, as a criteria for admission, but once you're admitted, they can't reevaluate and expel you because they're discovering you don't like a certain race or religion. You have to clearly violate their code of conduct, and if it's a public university they're limited.

If universities expelled every student who violated the code of conduct by making lewd jokes, etc etc etc they would be empty of students.

Yup. College is a time for young people to experiment with different things in a free environment, and discover themselves and who they want to be later in life. I bet you half the kids on that bus weren't racists but just wanted to be there to feel what it was like being around openly racist kids. Maybe some of them even sang along for the thrill of it, without actually agreeing.

I doubt there were ANY racist kids there. People just acting out in inappropriate ways because they could. The frat has black members, you know.

Does that chapter have black members now? I know they had blacks in the past.

I agree, at that age you don't know any better, you want just try and experience different things because you don't want to short changed in life.

But I'm sure there were at least a few of the kids who came from homes that had issues with blacks, and they brought those values with them to school.

 

[The Rabbi]

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.

Bullshit.

You don't know jack shit about the law.

This is an idiotic post.

ironic post is ironic.

 

[Jarhead]

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.

Bullshit.

You don't know jack shit about the law.

This is an idiotic post.

Why is it an idiotic post?

The dicks in the video did not threaten anyone nor did they incite a riot. They simply made it clear that they don't like black people. They did not discriminate goods or services nor did they deny entry.

When democratic politicians called the Tea Partyers "terrorists", were they not as guilty as these kids?

 

[The Rabbi]

I believe a university has the right to evaluate ones character as a criteria for admission....and expulsion.

I may be wrong, but when I was recruited, I was first interviewed by the coaches....but then I had to be interviewed by an admissions committee who were interested to get to know me as a person. Not simply grades and field talent.

That is correct, as a criteria for admission, but once you're admitted, they can't reevaluate and expel you because they're discovering you don't like a certain race or religion. You have to clearly violate their code of conduct, and if it's a public university they're limited.

If universities expelled every student who violated the code of conduct by making lewd jokes, etc etc etc they would be empty of students.

Yup. College is a time for young people to experiment with different things in a free environment, and discover themselves and who they want to be later in life. I bet you half the kids on that bus weren't racists but just wanted to be there to feel what it was like being around openly racist kids. Maybe some of them even sang along for the thrill of it, without actually agreeing.

I doubt there were ANY racist kids there. People just acting out in inappropriate ways because they could. The frat has black members, you know.

Does that chapter have black members now? I know they had blacks in the past.

I agree, at that age you don't know any better, you want just try and experience different things because you don't want to short changed in life.

But I'm sure there were at least a few of the kids who came from homes that had issues with blacks, and they brought those values with them to school.

I aw a report that said they had 3 members. I doubt any of those kids had issues with blacks. They grew up in the Obama era. They were schooled early on that racism was bad. They're just acting out. Like little kids like to say dirty words because they get attention.

 

[Roudy]

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.

Bullshit.

You don't know jack shit about the law.

This is an idiotic post.

Why is it an idiotic post?

The dicks in the video did not threaten anyone nor did they incite a riot. They simply made it clear that they don't like black people. They did not discriminate goods or services nor did they deny entry.

When democratic politicians called the Tea Partyers "terrorists", were they not as guilty as these kids?

Well, in the chant they claimed to deny entry to all blacks to their frat which is why the frat was shut down in record time. LOL

 

[Jarhead]

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.

Bullshit.

You don't know jack shit about the law.

This is an idiotic post.

Why is it an idiotic post?

The dicks in the video did not threaten anyone nor did they incite a riot. They simply made it clear that they don't like black people. They did not discriminate goods or services nor did they deny entry.

When democratic politicians called the Tea Partyers "terrorists", were they not as guilty as these kids?

Well, in the chant they claimed to deny entry to all blacks to their frat which is why the frat was shut down in record time. LOL

true...but they were not accused of denying blacks entry nor were they accused of denying blacks goods and services. They simply hate black people. So? Many black people hate white people. It is what it is. I wonder if it were a black group chanting "no whites allowed", if it would have even made the news.

 

[The Rabbi]

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.

Bullshit.

You don't know jack shit about the law.

This is an idiotic post.

Why is it an idiotic post?

The dicks in the video did not threaten anyone nor did they incite a riot. They simply made it clear that they don't like black people. They did not discriminate goods or services nor did they deny entry.

When democratic politicians called the Tea Partyers "terrorists", were they not as guilty as these kids?

Well, in the chant they claimed to deny entry to all blacks to their frat which is why the frat was shut down in record time. LOL

No, they were shut down for using the word n1gger and talking about lynching. If they were a black fraternity and singing about shooting Ferguson cops in the head they'd be asked to appear on American Idol.

 

[Freewill]

Now that this thread has run its course I have an observation, most people posting are hypocrites.

The side supporting the school forgets that they did not support a business that did exactly as the school did. I can certainly see where they don't agree with the baker or the florist that stands on their principle but none the less what they were doing is no less then what the school was doing. On the other hand those who supported the kids chanting racism and thus were denied service are the same ones that said the baker and the florist had the right to refuse services.

Talk about wanting both ways.

Seems to me that if services can be denied because of rhetoric then certainly services should be allowed to be denied if such services goes against sincerely held beliefs. But I doubt either side will see the hypocrisy in their positions.

Oooohhhh! Look! The dumbass thinks he's caught everyone in his web!!

You think that OU should be allowed to deny admission to the *******, don't you? And....the local Wal Mart should be able to tell a pair of dudes holding hands to leave the store, right?

You are a nut. So you siding with the school here doesn't carry any weight. Your motivation is fucked up.

So you can't disagree with what I said so you pervert what I said so you can attack your perversion and then throw insults. Not very intelligent of you but I expect that from a hypocrite liberal. I didn't catch anyone, you folks fell in a hole of hypocrisy.

Ahh the ye Olde strawman argument. Don't let it get to you, Free.

I thought I was being nice.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Now that this thread has run its course I have an observation, most people posting are hypocrites.

The side supporting the school forgets that they did not support a business that did exactly as the school did. I can certainly see where they don't agree with the baker or the florist that stands on their principle but none the less what they were doing is no less then what the school was doing. On the other hand those who supported the kids chanting racism and thus were denied service are the same ones that said the baker and the florist had the right to refuse services.

Talk about wanting both ways.

Seems to me that if services can be denied because of rhetoric then certainly services should be allowed to be denied if such services goes against sincerely held beliefs. But I doubt either side will see the hypocrisy in their positions.

Oooohhhh! Look! The dumbass thinks he's caught everyone in his web!!

You think that OU should be allowed to deny admission to the *******, don't you? And....the local Wal Mart should be able to tell a pair of dudes holding hands to leave the store, right?

You are a nut. So you siding with the school here doesn't carry any weight. Your motivation is fucked up.

So you can't disagree with what I said so you pervert what I said so you can attack your perversion and then throw insults. Not very intelligent of you but I expect that from a hypocrite liberal. I didn't catch anyone, you folks fell in a hole of hypocrisy.

Ahh the ye Olde strawman argument. Don't let it get to you, Free.

I thought I was being nice.

Nicer than I would have been.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Why not respond to what I said? You believe that OU ought I be able to deny admission to *******, don't you? You think a business should be able to deny service to a ****** or a faggot or a **** or a towel head.....if that's what the business owner wants to do, right?

 

[The Rabbi]

Why not respond to what I said? You believe that OU ought I be able to deny admission to *******, don't you? You think a business should be able to deny service to a ****** or a faggot or a **** or a towel head.....if that's what the business owner wants to do, right?

OU is a public institution. They cannot and should not deny admission to anyone who is qualified to go there.
Private businesses are private. They should be able to deny service to anyone they want.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I believe a university has the right to evaluate ones character as a criteria for admission....and expulsion.

I may be wrong, but when I was recruited, I was first interviewed by the coaches....but then I had to be interviewed by an admissions committee who were interested to get to know me as a person. Not simply grades and field talent.

That is correct, as a criteria for admission, but once you're admitted, they can't reevaluate and expel you because they're discovering you don't like a certain race or religion. You have to clearly violate their code of conduct, and if it's a public university they're limited.

If universities expelled every student who violated the code of conduct by making lewd jokes, etc etc etc they would be empty of students.

Yup. College is a time for young people to experiment with different things in a free environment, and discover themselves and who they want to be later in life. I bet you half the kids on that bus weren't racists but just wanted to be there to feel what it was like being around openly racist kids. Maybe some of them even sang along for the thrill of it, without actually agreeing.

I doubt there were ANY racist kids there. People just acting out in inappropriate ways because they could. The frat has black members, you know.

Coming from the guy who once said blacks were genetically unsuited for leadership roles,

that's quite a statement.

 

[The Rabbi]

I believe a university has the right to evaluate ones character as a criteria for admission....and expulsion.

I may be wrong, but when I was recruited, I was first interviewed by the coaches....but then I had to be interviewed by an admissions committee who were interested to get to know me as a person. Not simply grades and field talent.

That is correct, as a criteria for admission, but once you're admitted, they can't reevaluate and expel you because they're discovering you don't like a certain race or religion. You have to clearly violate their code of conduct, and if it's a public university they're limited.

If universities expelled every student who violated the code of conduct by making lewd jokes, etc etc etc they would be empty of students.

Yup. College is a time for young people to experiment with different things in a free environment, and discover themselves and who they want to be later in life. I bet you half the kids on that bus weren't racists but just wanted to be there to feel what it was like being around openly racist kids. Maybe some of them even sang along for the thrill of it, without actually agreeing.

I doubt there were ANY racist kids there. People just acting out in inappropriate ways because they could. The frat has black members, you know.

Coming from the guy who once said blacks were genetically unsuited for leadership roles,

that's quite a statement.

kewl story, bro.

 

[rightwinger]

Why not respond to what I said? You believe that OU ought I be able to deny admission to *******, don't you? You think a business should be able to deny service to a ****** or a faggot or a **** or a towel head.....if that's what the business owner wants to do, right?

OU is a public institution. They cannot and should not deny admission to anyone who is qualified to go there.
Private businesses are private. They should be able to deny service to anyone they want.

OU is a public institution that has rules of conduct

Those rules were not only violated, but the violators brought shame to themselves, their families, their fraternity and the university

In the 21st century, they are an embarrassment

 

[LoneLaugher]

Why not respond to what I said? You believe that OU ought I be able to deny admission to *******, don't you? You think a business should be able to deny service to a ****** or a faggot or a **** or a towel head.....if that's what the business owner wants to do, right?

OU is a public institution. They cannot and should not deny admission to anyone who is qualified to go there.
Private businesses are private. They should be able to deny service to anyone they want.

Weeeeeeeeeee! The nutter announces his complete inability to grasp the laws of this nation. Your take on this is unAmerican. As unAmerican as it gets.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Now that this thread has run its course I have an observation, most people posting are hypocrites.

The side supporting the school forgets that they did not support a business that did exactly as the school did. I can certainly see where they don't agree with the baker or the florist that stands on their principle but none the less what they were doing is no less then what the school was doing. On the other hand those who supported the kids chanting racism and thus were denied service are the same ones that said the baker and the florist had the right to refuse services.

Talk about wanting both ways.

Seems to me that if services can be denied because of rhetoric then certainly services should be allowed to be denied if such services goes against sincerely held beliefs. But I doubt either side will see the hypocrisy in their positions.

Oooohhhh! Look! The dumbass thinks he's caught everyone in his web!!

You think that OU should be allowed to deny admission to the *******, don't you? And....the local Wal Mart should be able to tell a pair of dudes holding hands to leave the store, right?

You are a nut. So you siding with the school here doesn't carry any weight. Your motivation is fucked up.

So you can't disagree with what I said so you pervert what I said so you can attack your perversion and then throw insults. Not very intelligent of you but I expect that from a hypocrite liberal. I didn't catch anyone, you folks fell in a hole of hypocrisy.

Ahh the ye Olde strawman argument. Don't let it get to you, Free.

I thought I was being nice.

Nicer than I would have been.

Oh knave! lest I so lucky that thee hath decided not to crush me with thy reply. I can't imagine what horrible things thee could has't hath said.

 

[BlindBoo]

Oh he's done a lot, he's divided America along racial, financial, and ethnic lines, and reaped the rewards

Not really, what his presidency has shown is that there are still many underlying racial problem in this country.

But I thought now that Americans were stupid enough to vote for an unqualified, anti capitalistic, anti American black man just because he's black to prove that they're not racist, Obama's presidency would be new era of healing and coexistence between blacks and whites. Instead, he's made it his mission to incite race riots, bash cops, and inject himself into criminal cases. Keep pouring gasoline on the fire, Holder.

Even if what you think were true, I imagine not one single white racist voted for him. Only a moron of the highest caliber couldn't see the racist foaming at the mouth even when President Obama was just a candidate for the office.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Oh he's done a lot, he's divided America along racial, financial, and ethnic lines, and reaped the rewards

Not really, what his presidency has shown is that there are still many underlying racial problem in this country.

YES, THE PEASANTPIMP OF THE UNION STATES HAS PROVEN THAT THE BLACK COMMUNITY IS RACIST TO THE BONE!

And that is something that I didn't realize before he was selected.