Federal Judge Halts Use of University Speech Code

[Tingkai]

Re: Federal Judge Halts Use of University Speech Code

The judge is wrong. His ruling is based on a misinterpretation of a basic English word. He apparently believes that "should" means "must".

The code states: "The expression of ones' beliefs should be communicated in a manner that does not provoke, harass, intimidate, or harm another."

In other words, here's a nice suggestion about how you should behave.

The judge thinks this section of the code prohibits such expression. It does not.

The problem with this university's code is not that it limits free speech, but rather it is pretty pointless. The code basically says:
1) Acts of intolerance will not be condoned (Does anyone think these acts would be condoned?)
2) People should try to talk nicely to each other (ho hum, boring)
3) Racism with malicious intent is not prohibited. (What a shocker. Guess that means the end of the annual lynch mob)
4) Subordination, intimidation and/or harassment with malicious intent is prohibited. (No kidding. I guess this might be why there are laws against intimidation and harassment with malicious intent).

The only problem with this code is what the hell do they mean by subordination.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Using this logic, no one is forced to go to Shippensburg University so it should be allowed to set its own rules.

The problem being that public universities are agents of the government. Shippensburg U setting this code is basically considered no different than the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania from setting this code.

In other words, here's a nice suggestion about how you should behave.

... with the threat of sanction . It isn't just this is how you should do things, it is also that you should do things this way or else we will assign penalties.

[Dinner]

I know at the Universityof California if you called someone a Nazi, a facist, or a "cracker" nothing would happen to you but if you called someone a "***" you could get expelled for being a bigot.

It's absolutely stupid the way some special interest groups have been able to hijack the system.

[mindseye]

I know at the Universityof California if you called someone a Nazi, a facist, or a "cracker" nothing would happen to you but if you called someone a "***" you could get expelled for being a bigot.

It's absolutely stupid the way some special interest groups have been able to hijack the system.

You really don't see the difference between those?

[Dinner]

Between cracker and gay? No both are a slander of something which is beyond the students control (I.E. race or sexual orientation).

[Imran Siddiqui]

I don't see the difference between 'cracker' and '***' either. Both are equally bad.

[mindseye]

Sorry guys, I'm through teaching for the day.

(Today is National Teacher's Day in China)

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Between cracker and gay?

Cracker: white native of Florida or Georgia.

Where's the insult?

[chequita guevara]

I think the judge was right, btw. Speech codes are bad.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Cracker: white native of Florida or Georgia.

Where's the insult?

This is just as dumb as saying:

******: black person

Where's the insult?

[Theben]

Corporations are private entities, but are subject to penalties if found negligent in cases of harassment.

Students can just as easily say "Comments toward me make it difficult to continue studying here," and now you have a "hostile environment".

I think the school feels it necessary to do something. Would you feel better if the school had no such policy, but expelled students/teachers anyway if they said/did the wrong thing?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Corporations are private entities, but are subject to penalties if found negligent in cases of harassment.

Then they can deal with harassment. This speech code covers much more, however, especially the nebulous term 'subordination'.

Students can just as easily say "Comments toward me make it difficult to continue studying here," and now you have a "hostile environment".

It isn't that easy.

[Theben]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Corporations are private entities, but are subject to penalties if found negligent in cases of harassment.

Then they can deal with harassment. This speech code covers much more, however, especially the nebulous term 'subordination'.

Then have them define the terminology a bit better.

Students can just as easily say "Comments toward me make it difficult to continue studying here," and now you have a "hostile environment".

It isn't that easy.

You've obviously never been threatened with a harassment charge.

[Ben Kenobi]

Don't go down this way...

Trust me. I've been on the recieving end of a ban from the student society regarding graphic abortion pictures. Yet our club still has to remain a paying member.

Be thankful you folks have a 1st Amendment. We don't have one here in Canada to protect freedom of speech.
Charter provisions for section 15 seem to override concerns for freedom of speech.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Cracker: white native of Florida or Georgia.

Where's the insult?

This is just as dumb as saying:

******: black person

Where's the insult?

It's not the same thing. The former is what Georgia and Florida natives called themselves (it had something to do with the whips they used to drive cattle). The latter is what white people called Black people to dehumanize them.