- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Calling Obama a "Watermelon Eating Baboon" Triggers Investigation at SLU
Posted on 4/18/16 at 2:59 pm to fr33manator
Posted on 4/18/16 at 2:59 pm to fr33manator
that was grade school nonsense to try to get children to ignore the troublemakers
I think it died out in the 50's or 60's
I think it died out in the 50's or 60's
0
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:01 pm to LucasP
quote:quote:
Freedom of speech is a thing we will have to tell our great grand kids about-
I strongly doubt we'll be allowed to talk about it.
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:01 pm to LucasP
quote:
I strongly doubt we'll be allowed to talk about it.
they simply won't believe you...
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:07 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Freedom of speech is a thing we will have to tell our great grand kids about-you know, something we did freely when we could think on our own.
This kind of hyperbole and misunderstanding of freedom of speech is as equally infuriating as the SJW agenda.
In 1820 you would have had your shite punched in and blackballed if you would have voiced your sympathy with the Brits or Indians. In 1920 you would have been ridiculed for having a pro-Black stance in the south. Freedom of speech has only protected you from suppression from the government. Private parties are free to react to your speech as they see fit, as that is also their free speech right.
If you take a stance that is against the populace, the government cannot oppress you, but the populace can do as they see fit. That has always been the case and it is nothing new.
ETA: Do these kids deserve this? Probably not, but to suggest it is a free speech protection is asinine.
This post was edited on 4/18/16 at 3:10 pm
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:11 pm to slackster
quote:
Freedom of speech has only protected you from suppression from the government. Private parties are free to react to your speech as they see fit, as that is also their free speech right.
If you take a stance that is against the populace, the government cannot oppress you, but the populace can do as they see fit. That has always been the case and it is nothing new.
How many tax funded public universities have "safe spaces" where no one around said students will say anything offensive? Or where certain races aren't allowed?
See the debacle at Mizzou.
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:20 pm to arseinclarse
I was told that the complaint originated from the watermelon growers association. Apparently there are things they do not want to be associated with.
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:21 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
How many tax funded public universities have "safe spaces" where no one around said students will say anything offensive? Or where certain races aren't allowed?
See the debacle at Mizzou.
None of this is applicable at St. Louis University. They get government grants, but those are usually restricted to a particular program so they do not apply to the entire university.
I'm a huge free speech advocate, and the activity at Mizzou was a problem, but this is a different animal altogether. Is it despicable? Probably. Is it a free speech violation? No, no it is not.
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:25 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Freedom of speech is a thing we will have to tell our great grand kids about-you know, something we did freely when we could think on our own.
Tell you what, how about you go to your boss and call him a dingleberry licker and see how far freedom of speech gets you.
Freedom of speech as stated in the Bill of Rights is not a license to say whatever you please without fear of consequences.
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:27 pm to arseinclarse
It's pretty silly to get bent out of shape over comments in a private chat, especially when the comments are about a public figure. I don't care how stupid the comments are, unless they're actually conspiring to do something illegal.
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:29 pm to arseinclarse
quote:= trashy
Jesuit
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:30 pm to Hog on the Hill
quote:
It's pretty silly to get bent out of shape over comments in a private chat, especially when the comments are about a public figure. I don't care how stupid the comments are, unless they're actually conspiring to do something illegal.
Couldn't agree more.
However, if these comments were about the CEO of your company and they made their way to him, you can bet your arse you'd be fired on the spot and no one would make freedom of speech violation claims.
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:31 pm to slackster
Not if you worked at a watermelon farm
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:32 pm to Goldrush25
quote:
Tell you what, how about you go to your boss and call him a dingleberry licker and see how far freedom of speech gets you.
Fortunately my boss might laugh it with me. He agrees with me for the most part.
Beyond that, I don't think this conversation involved any one person being employed by another. Did I miss that somewhere?
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:36 pm to NYNolaguy1
I guess when you win the A10 regular season 4 years in a row, you start to feel invincible.
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:45 pm to ProjectP2294
Hey white folks, you know why "honkey" never took off? It's because uncoloreds don't give a shite what names you call them, they just go on about their business. Can't even imagine a world without butthurt anymore, thanks Obama!
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:51 pm to slackster
quote:
None of this is applicable at St. Louis University. They get government grants, but those are usually restricted to a particular program so they do not apply to the entire university.
I'm a huge free speech advocate, and the activity at Mizzou was a problem, but this is a different animal altogether. Is it despicable? Probably. Is it a free speech violation? No, no it is not.
Is St Louis U not a public university? Does the 1st Amendment not apply to them since this is a public institution? For example, would it be allowable if St. Louis U declared that going forward they were officially a Christian University and all it's students must follow the Christian faith?
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:56 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Is St Louis U not a public university?
No, no it is not. It actually is a a Roman Catholic-affiliated private research university.
The fact that it exists in St. Louis, MO can be misleading.
This post was edited on 4/18/16 at 3:56 pm
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:58 pm to slackster
quote:
No, no it is not. It actually is a a Roman Catholic-affiliated private research university.
The fact that it exists in St. Louis, MO can be misleading.
Well that changes everything. This being a private institution, it should be free to set it's own guidelines of what is and what isn't acceptable.
Posted on 4/18/16 at 3:59 pm to BigSquirrel
quote:
"honkey"
RA'd
Posted on 4/18/16 at 4:03 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
This being a private institution, it should be free to set it's own guidelines of what is and what isn't acceptable.
Prepare yourself for the down votes despite your accurate take.
Does it suck that a private conversation got released? Sure, but it is pretty obvious that people in that convo didn't actually condone the comment because it was saved and sent to other people. You have to be careful these days.
I don't condone the investigation, but I also think it is ridiculous to paint this as another victory in the war on free speech. This guy isn't going to get locked up over it and the government is not involved.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News