A Multicultural Sorority?

[DSTCHAOS]

LOL. What's your agenda, Kevin? You went from saying you don't care if people are offended, to attempts at "lefties" insults, to banging these cases into the ground.

You seem way too settled into an agenda to grasp that no matter how much you want it to be, it isn't cut and dry/black and white.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by starang21

however, while this might not actually hold any water in the court of law.....this is hardly a frivolous issue, and thus would probably not get any sort of sanction. and by calling it (the suit) frivolous, are you saying that the native american group has no basis to be offended? and you still haven't answered my other question.

They can be offended all they want. They just don't have a lawsuit, nor can they use the University's judicial system to go after Gamma Phi Beta (if anyone cares about the Constitution, that is).

[starang21]

Originally Posted by Kevin

They can be offended all they want. They just don't have a lawsuit, nor can they use the University's judicial system to go after Gamma Phi Beta (if anyone cares about the Constitution, that is).

does that make it frivilous? i think not. we're talking about a group being offended, and taking action upon being offended. whether or not they win, it doesn't mean that they'll be sanctioned. weren't you implying that there would be acton against them if they filed?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

LOL. What's your agenda, Kevin? You went from saying you don't care if people are offended, to attempts at "lefties" insults, to banging these cases into the ground.

You seem way too settled into an agenda to grasp that no matter how much you want it to be, it isn't cut and dry/black and white.

In this case, do you think the school's policy here is being promulgated by someone right of center? Do those people even exist in education outside of Liberty College, etc.?

I have no agenda except to say that content based restrictions on free speech are subject to strict scrutiny which means that the University doesn't have the legitimate power to do this. My "agenda" is free speech.

The school can no more do this than the state of North Dakota can pass a law declaring the Lakota Separatist organizations (if there are any) to be no longer allowed to advocate independence because the very idea of them existing is offensive to white people.

You don't have a right not to be offended.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by starang21

does that make it frivilous? i think not. we're talking about a group being offended, and taking action upon being offended. whether or not they win, it doesn't mean that they'll be sanctioned. weren't you implying that there would be acton against them if they filed?

There could be. I can't think of a good faith cause of action here. It sounds like the group filed through the University, so if the University acts, it'd be subject to a Civil Rights case if the sorority wanted to fight it (which they won't).

[starang21]

Originally Posted by Kevin

There could be. I can't think of a good faith cause of action here. It sounds like the group filed through the University, so if the University acts, it'd be subject to a Civil Rights case if the sorority wanted to fight it (which they won't).

i'm willing to bet nothing happens to the group if they file. this is hardly something that can be looked at as "frivilous."

[gee_ess]

Originally Posted by gee_ess
PC sensitivity training

Wording it this way undermines the seriousness and significance of it.


I wasn't trying to undermine the significance of the situation. Maybe my wording seemed offensive to you because I have been arguing for Gamma Phi Beta's side of the issue.
However, I truly meant that if the intent of the suit and complaint was that the Native Americans were offended, then educating the members on the issue seemed more appropriate than a social sanction.

I think the question was asked prior to my post regarding what consequences should have been enforced? Do you think a social sanction is really justified in this instance? Does that solve the ignorance or insensitivity?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by starang21

i'm willing to bet nothing happens to the group if they file. this is hardly something that can be looked at as "frivilous."

I don't think they'll file a federal case. As I said, there's no (real) cause of action for this sort of "discrimination." It's probably through the University, and no, nothing bad will happen to the group except that the University should probably tell them "sorry, but we can't adjudicate these things," which will probably not happen because they've already placed the sorority on social probation, "pending review." In the end, I suspect the sorority will subject itself to a few hours of sensitivity training, then agree to be on some sort of probation for the next semester or so because they want to protect their image.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by Kevin

In this case, do you think the school's policy here is being promulgated by someone right of center?

No.

Originally Posted by Kevin

I have no agenda except to say that content based restrictions on free speech are subject to strict scrutiny which means that the University doesn't have the legitimate power to do this. My "agenda" is free speech.

Oh you have an agenda beyond "free speech." Your posts convey your opinions on offending groups of people, as well as your opinions of those who would disagree with your stance (you assume they are "lefties" which is a false assumption).

Originally Posted by Kevin

The school can no more do this than the state of North Dakota can pass a law declaring the Lakota Separatist organizations (if there are any) to be no longer allowed to advocate independence because the very idea of them existing is offensive to white people.

Bad analogy.

Anyway, I think that people are championing the causes of those who have these parties and "ugly woman competitions" as if it serves some larger "Constitutional Rights" purpose. Not because people actually agree with the views expressed in these events. Some people do, of course, and Kevin might be one of them---that's his business. However, there are better things to champion freedom of speech based on. For instance, if a chapter's (not the chapter in this thread) "redskin party" is the epitome of Constitutional Rights then that reminds us of how far we have not come as a KKKountry.

[starang21]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I don't think they'll file a federal case. As I said, there's no (real) cause of action for this sort of "discrimination." It's probably through the University, and no, nothing bad will happen to the group except that the University should probably tell them "sorry, but we can't adjudicate these things," which will probably not happen because they've already placed the sorority on social probation, "pending review." In the end, I suspect the sorority will subject itself to a few hours of sensitivity training, then agree to be on some sort of probation for the next semester or so because they want to protect their image.

there isn't discrimination per se, and i think the local chapter's cage was rattled enough to for them (and others) to know that that's not the image they're wanting.

[starang21]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

KKKountry.

watch out now. you'll be labeled as anti american.

:unsure:

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by gee_ess

educating the members on the issue seemed more appropriate than a social sanction.

Better wording.

Diversity, tolerance, and sensitivity trainings are not about "political correctness." That's a tongue in cheek approach to education and equality that undermines the importance of such efforts. If someone says "oh I'm being forced to bite my tongue so I won't offend 'those people,'" they aren't taking it seriously and are continuing the way of thinking (and often the behaviors) that they had before the education efforts.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by starang21

watch out now. you'll be labeled as anti american.

:unsure:

Flashback. America rocks.

The KKKountry called AmeriKKKa doesn't.

[SWTXBelle]

Okay, I'm trying not to get into much of this since I don't want anything I write as being construed as being a response from Gamma Phi, because it's NOT - anything I write is mine, and mine alone. I realize that most of you know that, but I just want to get that out there.

I think there are two issues that are being discussed:

1.) The actual event in question. Let it be noted that Gamma Phi has apologized, and is working with the university. I specifically asked what you thought would be a proper response, and received no answers, so I have to assume that everyone is okay with social probation and education. Heretofore there have been no calls for tar and feathering.

and

2.) The legality of a hypothetical response of the university. (Right now, all we know for sure is that the chapter is on social probation, but it is not clear that it is from the university or the HQ). It took four months for the offended parties to come forth, so who knows how long the university's investigation will take, or what actions will follow.

Some conflict is coming from a confusion between the two. I think it is possible for an action to be condemned as insensitive without it being illegal. A possible point is that those who filed a complaint with the university have no legal standing to argue for harm. So while they might not have a legal case, they certainly have a right to claim they are offended. But let's not confuse a moral right with a legal one.

[starang21]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Flashback. America rocks.

The KKKountry called AmeriKKKa doesn't.

it's your constitutional right to kkkall is amerikkka.

free speech, remember?