Kevin. Aren't you always shocked that people don't realize this. I always am !

The university also has a duty to maintain a hostile-free environment. Your free speech is my hostile environment.

Here is the code of student conduct for OSU. http://studentlife.osu.edu/csc/

My understanding from my adviser days was that GLOs formally recognized by the university are considered as "guests" on campus. Meaning, any action done by the GLO that is not in alignment with the school can be penalized, including being no longer recognized by the school. Thus, "kicked off campus".

Maybe these GLOs should fight the school and sue. Maybe they would win. But, that is just going to make it harder for the remaining GLOs to operate on campus.

If it comes down to the university being sued by every GLO, then it would be in the university's interest to no longer allow GLOs on campus.

You (the general you) really need to see the big picture. One incident of one chapter can have repercussions on all GLO chapters.

That is why I think PiKA nationals came out with their statement about themed parties.

A chapter who sues and wins the lawsuit wins the battle, but could loose the war by making it hard for other GLOs in the future.

And, maybe I am looking at this from a NPHC point of view. We generally have a very tight hand on our undergraduate chapters and members. It is nothing for us to expel individual members and pull chapter charters for conduct deemed unbecoming of the org.

You can find expelled members and chapters on our public website.http://www.sgrho1922.org/expulsions-suspensions

I'm sure that student code is nice and all, but this happened at Ohio U, not Ohio State.

And it's up to the supposedly offended party - the sorority - to voice their displeasure. We always hear "if a person feels they've been harassed/assaulted/victimized they have. This doesn't seem to go the other way - if people DON'T feel victimized, some nebshit feels the need to go over their heads and complain about it anyway, and pays no attention to what the "offended party" actually wants or what would make them happy.

You don't control public opinion.

And you're being naive to think actions don't have consequences.

Sorry about that.

I agree. In this case, however, the university is going to do what it needs to to show that it can handle a potentially damaging situation.

And, the only thing situations like this will do is just re-affirm negative stereotypes people have about GLOs. We are not doing ourselves any favors by trying to blow this off as "kids will be kids".

As you are aware, no matter how much philanthropy and community service we do does not seem to trump a few rowdy members in the eyes of non-GLO members. People only want to focus on the negative.

And you're being ridiculous if you think anyone cares that much about these things when awarding grants. Seriously, that's just dumb as hell.

Oh. My. God.

Some guys sang a lewd song.

Call the FBI. Right. NOW.

Please go back and read my post. My point was the image GLOs have to the public in terms of how a university may be viewed in the public / private sector, not receiving grants from the government.

Show us one grant which was denied because a fraternity sang a lewd song. Please do that.

I didn't say a grant was denied. Did you read?

I said because grants are harder to attain due to limited funding by the government, universities are now looking towards the private sector / business sector as a means to support the school.

Private businesses can decide on a whim whether or not to collaborate with a school. If the image of the school is not favorable to the business, then the business can easily not collaborate with the school.

Please go back and read what I posted.

I said because grants are harder to attain due to limited funding by the government, universities are now looking towards the private sector / business sector as a means to support the school.

Private businesses can decide on a whim whether or not to collaborate with a school. If the image of the school is not favorable to the business, then the business can easily not collaborate with the school.

So like I said, give one single example of a university being denied a grant due to limited funding by the government because a fraternity did something offensive. You obviously think this is real and took the time to post to warn universities of this possibility. You should be able to provide a single example of this happening at some point in human history. You've shown you have a very limited working knowledge of what students' rights are, you've been shown that what the school did here (despite your support) is contrary to student rights. Despite that, you've apparently doubled down on your asinine comments. Why is it so hard to admit you're wrong?

You are still not reading / understanding what I said.

I did not say what you are trying to accuse me of saying. You are choosing to misinterpret my post.

"I disagree with what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it. " Its that which forms the basis for much of our liberty.

I don't think that many of these things that are being said are ok. Or just " kids being kids." I think much of it is awful and demeaning. But they are words.

And our fundamental governing document requires that the government ( which it has long been recognized includes public universities) can't take steps to punish those words. Social suspension etc...is punishment ( a long line of case law makes this clear). . Case law has long established that you can't make " hate speech" punishable even though people still try

Words need to be met with words. Students who disagree should be countering with their own words. Protests, rallies. Etc. but they have to recognize that they can't set as their goal getting their public university to quah the speech of those they disagree with. Instead they have to override the hatred with their own speech.

Really, though, if the best argument you can make in defense of your actions is "free speech," you are probably doing something shitty.

I am not misinterpreting, I am saying it is flat stupid, not to mention dangerous to our organizations to be suggesting that universities could be missing out on research grants because universities failed to adequately punish speech by fraternities which universities deem offensive.

That's what you said, I'm not misinterpreting.

This board is reviewed by Greek Life professionals from around the country and I simply will not tolerate such uninformed posts. That said, I have been careful to QFP because I want people to realize just how truly unfounded such claims are. I asked you to provide a single example of this happening, you can't do it.