All it took was 140 characters for Texas Christian University to suspend a conservative student who posted a series of social networking posts that insulted the Islamic State, the Baltimore rioters and Mexicans.
TCU banned Harry Vincent from most campus activities, ordered him to perform 60 hours of community service and attend a diversity training class.
What was his crime?
quote
The 19-year-old, who is a member of the College Republicans and the Young Americans for Freedom, said he was told by the university that his conservative views were “inappropriate.”
“These hoodrat criminals in Baltimore need to be shipped off and exiled to the sahara desert,” he wrote. “Maybe then they’ll realize how much we provide for them (welfare, college tuition, Obama phone’s, medicare, etc.”
In regards to Islam he wrote, “This is clearly not a religion of peace.”
He also used the word “beaner” a derogatory term to describe Mexicans.
The complaint didn't even come from another student at the college.
quote
A former middle school classmate took great offense at Harry’s tweets and launched what became a Twitter lynch mob. The unnamed woman, who has no ties to TCU, urged her followers to contact the university and complain.
“This a**hole has been posting racist and disgusting comments on Twitter/Facebook,” she wrote on Tumblr. “When I confronted him about it, he referred to me as an ‘Islamic s**thead.”
The university took swift action. Associate Dean of Students Glory Robinson ordered Harry to apologize for what he had written on his private social networking pages.
“Dean Robinson said I was going to need to write an apology letter and a letter stating what sort of punishment I thought I deserved,” Harry told me. “She told me not to use Freedom of Speech as a defense – or else I would be more severely punished.”
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 08-04-2015).]
'Progressive' bullies win the day again. Hopefully some TCU donors will call the Dean's office and let them know their future gifts will go to schools that actually allow the free exchange of ideas. Sheesh.
I've heard liberals make pretty good pinatas....ya got to hit them a little hard to get all the candy to spill out, but apparently doing it with an ax solves that problem.
A few weeks ago there was a discussion in Austria about an apprentice at Porsche who made a racist comment on a Facebook post (on a picture of refugee children playing under a water shower provided by local firefighters as the weather was very warm he suggested that a flame-thrower be used instead). Porsche terminated his apprentice contract within days, saying that the mindset was incompatible with their company values.
It's a similar situation. However, both TCU and Porsche are private enterprises and can therefore select who they want as students or employees, I guess. If the student or the apprentice has uttered statements like they did during their interviews, they would probably not been accepted or hired in the first place.
On the other hand, should personal statements done away from campus or the workplace be something that universities and/or companies can use to justify punitive action?
I'm a bit torn on this...
[This message has been edited by yellowstone (edited 08-05-2015).]
'Progressive' bullies win the day again. Hopefully some TCU donors will call the Dean's office and let them know their future gifts will go to schools that actually allow the free exchange of ideas. Sheesh.
Tolerance is a matter of perspective. What you consider intolerance can be attributed to tolerance. For example: "your" (not specifically you) intolerance of gay marriage and accusations of intolerance from "them" when you express "your" dislike, stems form "their" tolerance of gay marriage. Come on, it's not that hard to understand and find.
[This message has been edited by Khw (edited 08-06-2015).]
You need to realize that Conservatives are tolerant by nature. If we weren't, the nation would not have fallen prey to the Liberal dismantling of the Constitution. Think of Conservatives as parents who allow their children the freedom to learn from their mistakes (within limits), rather than sheltering them from the realities of life. Many Conservatives started out as Liberals, but then grew up.
Are conservatives tolerant towards those who hold different views than their own? I don't think so. I was a hard core conservative at one time, actually reading and believing John Birch literature and I was a registered republican. I swung to the left before I was able to see the fault of both parties. I would probably pick a democrat over a republican these days but that is far from saying that I believe in the democrat party. I've said it over and over here before. Both parties are bought and paid for by wealthy people who are interested in only furthering their own wealth. The republican party is slightly worse in this respect but not by much and the democrats dole out welfare to undeserving people in order to get their vote. I'm disgusted with both parties.
Are conservatives tolerant towards those who hold different views than their own? I don't think so. I was a hard core conservative at one time, actually reading and believing John Birch literature and I was a registered republican. I swung to the left before I was able to see the fault of both parties. I would probably pick a democrat over a republican these days but that is far from saying that I believe in the democrat party. I've said it over and over here before. Both parties are bought and paid for by wealthy people who are interested in only furthering their own wealth. The republican party is slightly worse in this respect but not by much and the democrats dole out welfare to undeserving people in order to get their vote. I'm disgusted with both parties.
But you're in love with Bernie Sanders. You've said he's the only honest politician out there, so apparently your distrust of the Democrat party doesn't taint your belief in him. I'm not saying you're wrong - just pointing out that even though you don't trust both parties, there is at least one Democrat you do trust above all other politicians.
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 08-07-2015).]
One - The John Birch Society is not exactly mainstream conservative. The TEA party in mainstream conservative.
Two - Where do you get the idea that the Republicans are more influenced by big money when 17 of the top 20 financial donors heavily favor the Democrats?
Are conservatives tolerant towards those who hold different views than their own? I don't think so. I was a hard core conservative at one time, actually reading and believing John Birch literature and I was a registered republican. I swung to the left before I was able to see the fault of both parties. I would probably pick a democrat over a republican these days but that is far from saying that I believe in the democrat party. I've said it over and over here before. Both parties are bought and paid for by wealthy people who are interested in only furthering their own wealth. The republican party is slightly worse in this respect but not by much and the democrats dole out welfare to undeserving people in order to get their vote. I'm disgusted with both parties.
It seems that whenever the question of political IDEOLOGY comes up you discuss political PARTYS instead.
You said: "I would probably pick a democrat over a republican these days but that is far from saying that I believe in the democrat party."
That means that you agree with, and believe in, the *ideology* of a candidate supported by the DEMOCRAT PARTY, an organization that *also* believes in, agrees with and supports that candidate's ideology.
You can't simply refuse to recognize it for what it is and then try to convince yourself or others that you are somehow "in the middle" by making generalizations about both major political parties afterwards. You made an ideological choice, and then you want to somehow "mitigate" it.
At least have the courage of your own convictions.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 08-07-2015).]
But you're in love with Bernie Sanders. You've said he's the only honest politician out there, so apparently your distrust of the Democrat party doesn't taint your belief in him. I'm not saying you're wrong - just pointing out that even though you don't trust both parties, there is at least one Democrat you do trust above all other politicians.
He was originally an independent. That is not a doorway to the presidency. I believe that he had to make a choice. That's too bad. I would have loved to have an independent Bernie as a president.
One - The John Birch Society is not exactly mainstream conservative. The TEA party in mainstream conservative.
Two - Where do you get the idea that the Republicans are more influenced by big money when 17 of the top 20 financial donors heavily favor the Democrats?
The John Birch society was just to show how far right I was at one time. Is that right? The demo are the top beneficiaries of the top financial donors? Could be. Have I mentioned that I don't like either major party?
It seems that whenever the question of political IDEOLOGY comes up you discuss political PARTYS instead.
You said: "I would probably pick a democrat over a republican these days but that is far from saying that I believe in the democrat party."
That's patently ridiculous. I'm willing to bet that you have already given me a -. You have a talent for twisting everything I say. I'm aware that you think everything republican is good and everything democratic is bad. What else can I say? You are just as sure that the republican party is going to fix everything as I am that the entire political system is corrupt and long overdue for an overhaul. That means that you agree with, and believe in, the *ideology* of a candidate supported by the DEMOCRAT PARTY, an organization that *also* believes in, agrees with and supports that candidate's ideology.
You can't simply refuse to recognize it for what it is and then try to convince yourself or others that you are somehow "in the middle" by making generalizations about both major political parties afterwards. You made an ideological choice, and then you want to somehow "mitigate" it.
At least have the courage of your own convictions.
Sorry for the way that came out. My reply was right after your patently ridiculous remark.
[This message has been edited by dratts (edited 08-07-2015).]
He was originally an independent. That is not a doorway to the presidency. I believe that he had to make a choice. That's too bad. I would have loved to have an independent Bernie as a president.
Once again, we aren't talking about the PARTY, were are talking about IDEOLOGY. Political belief. It doesn't matter whether Bernie has a "I", "D", "R" of even a "Z" after his name, it's his POLITICAL IDEOLOGY that matters and Bernie is an openly avowed Socialist. Your support of Bernie doesn't place you anywhere near the "center" of the American political spectrum.
Once again, we aren't talking about the PARTY, were are talking about IDEOLOGY. Political belief. It doesn't matter whether Bernie has a "I", "D", "R" of even a "Z" after his name, it's his POLITICAL IDEOLOGY that matters and Bernie is an openly avowed Socialist. Your support of Bernie doesn't place you anywhere near the "center" of the American political spectrum.
Bernies 'socialism' is not the old 'communism'. Whether you believe it or not we absolutely depend on many socialist programs in this country. I do and so do you. That's not to say that socialism is the answer to everything. We need a mix. Socialism as Bernie promotes is not the old evil ambition killing, suck of the tit of others work that it used to be. We're never going to like each other. Way too much difference between us. I used to be a lot like you. I've evolved.
Sorry for the way that came out. My reply was right after your patently ridiculous remark.
How appropriate that in a topic titled "Liberal Tolerance" you would say:
"I'm willing to bet that you have already given me a -. You have a talent for twisting everything I say. I'm aware that you think everything republican is good and everything democratic is bad."
The idea of handing out negative ratings in political discussions around here seems to always come up with Leftists and Liberals, and here you are "betting" that somehow I have given you a negative rating because of a political discussion. WHY do you assume that? Is that what you would do? Is that what you have done to me?
Liberal Tolerance, indeed. Nice to see how the thought process works.
Additionally, please point out ANYWHERE on this forum where you can support your statement that I; "think everything republican is good and everything democratic is bad."
Socialism as Bernie promotes is not the old evil ambition killing, suck of the tit of others work that it used to be.
This has me intrigued. What kind of socialism is it? How is it different? I'm genuinely interested because the talking points from him I've heard so far haven't been anything new. What sets him apart?
How appropriate that in a topic titled "Liberal Tolerance" you would say:
"I'm willing to bet that you have already given me a -. You have a talent for twisting everything I say. I'm aware that you think everything republican is good and everything democratic is bad."
The idea of handing out negative ratings in political discussions around here seems to always come up with Leftists and Liberals, and here you are "betting" that somehow I have given you a negative rating because of a political discussion. WHY do you assume that? Is that what you would do? Is that what you have done to me?
Liberal Tolerance, indeed. Nice to see how the thought process works.
Additionally, please point out ANYWHERE on this forum where you can support your statement that I; "think everything republican is good and everything democratic is bad."
So I haven't received a - from you? Doesn't matter. I think that I've pretty much received all the negatives I can get since no one can give a negative twice. Have you ever said anything republican is bad or anything democratic is good? I must have missed it.
Originally posted by dratts: Have you ever said anything republican is bad or anything democratic is good? I must have missed it.
For alot of people there arent many things that fall clearly and only behind those lines. Those two words in the sense of politics dont even hold fixed meaning thru a century.
[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 08-07-2015).]
Bernies 'socialism' is not the old 'communism'. Whether you believe it or not we absolutely depend on many socialist programs in this country. I do and so do you. That's not to say that socialism is the answer to everything. We need a mix. Socialism as Bernie promotes is not the old evil ambition killing, suck of the tit of others work that it used to be. We're never going to like each other. Way too much difference between us. I used to be a lot like you. I've evolved.
Ah yes! The same old saw: "Socialism didn't work all those times before because it wasn't done right. THIS TIME it will be different."
quote
Originally posted by dratts:
We're never going to like each other. Way too much difference between us. I used to be a lot like you. I've evolved.
You think you do, but you don't know me. You never were "a lot like me".
You say you "evolved".
I matured. I became a rational adult. As a youngster in college I had very different political ideas. Maybe further left than you could possibly begin to imagine. (Anti-War, Anti-Establishment, SDS, UATWMF, etc, etc.), Been there. Done that. Then I grew up.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 08-07-2015).]
