Suck it, Ben.

[Asher]

And Andy You're a Star is pretty explicitly gay, isn't it? It's clearly about a crush on a high school athlete:

On the field I remember you were incredible
Hey shut up, hey shut up, yeah
On the field I remember you were incredible
Hey shut up, hey shut up, yeah
On the match with the boys, you think you're all alone
With the pain that you drain from love
In a car with a girl, promise me she's not your world
Cause Andy, you're a star

Leave your number on the locker and I'll give you a call
Hey shut up, hey shut up, yeah
Leave your legacy in gold on the plaques that line the hall
Hey shut up, hey shut up, yeah

On the streets, such a sweet face jumping in town
In the staff when the verdict is in
In a car with a girl, promise me she's not your world
Cause Andy, you're a star
In nobody's eyes but mine
Andy, you're a star
In nobody's eyes but mine
Andy, you're a star
In nobody's eyes
In nobody's eyes but mine

Add in the fact that The Killers got their start by playing in gay bars and tranny bars, and it makes even more sense. Ditto for some of the other lyrics on Hot Fuss ("Somebody told me / You had a boyfriend / Who looked like a girlfriend / That I had in February of last year").

[Asher]

I think you're missing out on listening closely to the Killers lyrics. A song off the new album, Dustland Fairytale, is another one that only really comes to life when you understand its meaning.

It starts off very slow and picks up slowly and the tempo increases to coincide with the lyrics. It's about his mom -- who is dying from cancer -- and basically reminisces about her life and how she met his dad (how it starts), then how quickly life can pass by, and it ends with him begging her not to "go".

A Dustland Fairytale beginning
With just another white trash county kiss
In '61
Long brown hair and foolish eyes

He'd look just like you'd want him to
Some kind of slick chrome American prince
Blue jean serenade
Moon River what'd you do to me
I don't believe you

Saw Cinderella in a party dress
But she was looking for a nightgown
I saw the devil wrapping up his hands
He's getting ready for the showdown
I saw the minute that I turned away
I got my money on a pawn tonight

A change came in disguise of revelation
Set his soul on fire
She said she always knew he'd come around
And the decades disappear
Like sinking ships but we persevere
God gives us hope
But we still fear what we don't know
Your mind is poison

Castles in the sky sit stranded, vandalized
The drawbridge is closing

Saw Cinderella in a party dress
But she was looking for a nightgown
I saw the devil wrapping up his hands
He's getting ready for the showdown
I saw the ending when they turned the page
I threw my money and I ran away

Straight to the valley of the great divide
Out where the dreams all hide
Out where the wind don't blow
Out here the good girls die
And the sky won't snow
Out here the bird don't sing
Out here the field don't grow
Out here the bell don't ring
Out here the bell don't ring

Out here the good girls die

Now Cinderella don't you go to sleep
It's such a bitter form of refuge
Well don't you know the kingdom's under siege
And everybody needs you
Is there still magic in the midnight sun
Or did you leave it back in '61?
In the cadence of a young man's eyes
Out where the dreams all hide

[Blaupanzer]

Good evocative lyrics and images.

[DaShi]

Well, Ben. No result. I think it's apology and sig. time for you. Get to it!

[Ben Kenobi]

Da Shi:

I was engaged in this activity called 'sleeping'. You may have heard of it.

From post number 98 in this thread:

The legal issue aside, there is precidents of what is considered decent to show in public. The holocaust images are placed in enclosed structures such as museums and universities, where there is a more intellectual atmosphere and, more importantly, where people have a choice whether they wish to see those kinds of images.

[Asher]

Now contrast that quote with what you alleged he said, and notice the difference...

[rah]

Don't worry, he'll be able to irrationally connect them.

[DaShi]

Yes, Ben. Connect them. Otherwise, you owe me an apology and a sig.

[Ben Kenobi]

Asher:

It's a common tactic to strip prolife clubs of club status. It's been done many, many times by student unions across the country.

You act like this is something strange and new. What will happen is that the club will sue the student union, continue on as they have and be reinstated the following year.

We even have a whole set of legal documents that just get recycled. The only thing that changes are the names.

A pro-life student group already facing trespassing charges over an anti-abortion protest could see its university club status and some funding revoked next week.

What they mean is that the university will freeze their club accounts and take the money that is in there, money that the club has raised for their own activities. All this means is that the club will simply use their real accounts. None of the clubs hold the donations they receive in their student union accounts, because of these tactics in the past. All this means is that the club will sue to get their own money back from the student union. Not a bright move.

The University of Calgary Students’ Union will hold a hearing on Tuesday into whether it should take sanctions against Campus Pro-Life after it violated university guidelines surrounding its Genocide Awareness Project.

This means that there is going to be a campaign directed at the student union to convince them otherwise and that it really isn't a wise decision to ban clubs based on their political leanings.

“The university issued a written warning to the organization some time ago. . . . We issued our own warning (at the time that) if they were to violate any university policy, we would not be defending them and would be putting in some sort of sanctions,” said students’ union president Dalmy Baez.

Some student union! Isn't the purpose of the student union to defend students from arbitrary administrative decisions and discrimination? The student union has outlived it's usefulness quite some time ago. If this were any other club, the student union would be condemning the action of the administration and standing up for their students.

“We don’t tolerate any club that will violate university policy.”

Change that, "we only tolerate clubs that have agendas that are the same as ours".

“The student union is supposed to represent the students and is supposed to be our voice and to protect us. The fact that they’re possibly going to impose sanctions against us makes me very frustrated.”

Exactly. That's the bottom line here. The student union has abandoned their responsibility to the students. Are they the 'administrative union?' Sure sounds like it.

Clubs are also entitled to apply for some student union funding, including food and beverage money and up to $1,000 for holding a special event, said Baez.

Not a big loss. The big deal is the booking, and the financial services that the student union provides to maintain control over club funds.

“We, as the students’ union, are supposed to be representing students and supporting them in any way possible. There are limits to this,” said Baez.

Again, the policies only apply to some clubs and not to others.

“We could and will still do everything we can. They won’t stop us from spreading the message of life on campus. But it will make things much more difficult for us,” Hallman said.

And that's the bottom line. Protests will still happen. The Student Union has made a huge mistake here.

[DaShi]

Da Shi:

I was engaged in this activity called 'sleeping'. You may have heard of it.

You do know, it can been seen when your on. And all your posts are time-stamped. You've had plenty of time.

[Asher]

Asher:

It's a common tactic to strip prolife clubs of club status. It's been done many, many times by student unions across the country.

You act like this is something strange and new. What will happen is that the club will sue the student union, continue on as they have and be reinstated the following year.

I would LOVE it if the club tried to sue the SU.

Clubs agree to abide by university policies and bylaws. They broke those policies and bylaws and even broke criminal law (charged with trespassing). The SU is well within their rights to strip this club of their club status for breaking the agreement. They were provided ample warning and ignored the warnings, as well. There's no legal ground for them to stand on.

If they claim it's discrimination against their stance on the abortion issue, all the SU has to do is point to the other groups with avowed pro-life stances and protests: the Christian Students Association (CSA), the Chinese-Christian Students Association, the "Choose Life" club, and the others that all have pro-life opinions and literature on campus. It's clearly not the stance that is resulting in their revocation of status, but their inability to play by the same rules as everyone else.

[Ben Kenobi]

No ideas were banned.

Yes, GAP has been banned. That much is clear. Why turn the signs inward unless you simply have issue with the idea that the signs express. U of C does not have a consistant policy on graphic images, as I have said throughout the thread, they permit the holocaust and genocide images when used elsewhere.

The graphic images, like the decapitated 3 year old girl, are what was banned from being shown to unconsenting citizens.

Send me a PM of the image in question. I'm not sure which image you are talking about.

The university policy doesn't specify an image, then want the entire display turned inside, not just one particular image.

The university even permitted those disgusting images to be displayed as part of the protest, but only to people who explicitly agree to see them (by walking within the inwards-facing displays).

A requirement which is not imposed on any other protest or display, graphic or not. The signs face outwards because that is what is more effective. I don't see why the university should be condemning the display for the ideas that they express, if we supposedly live in a free and democratic society.

As the student society in 2006 said, the images are protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Obviously those were merely words, that they didn't mean and don't intend to honour.

No ideas were banned here, the only thing that was banned was the emotional assault your group was providing to innocent passersby.

There is no law against hurt feelings Asher. I could sue you for emotional assault for starting this thread. I mean really. There is no right not to be offended, all there is, is a right to freedom of speech and expression. This means that you can offend me, but that also means you have to allow speech that you don't particularly like.

Or as Voltaire said, I may not agree with a word you say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it.

Again, the display was to be permitted but under the condition that only people who agreed to see such graphic images could see them. It's public decency.

It's censorship. What's next? Fig leaves? Whiting out the signs?

Don't ****ing steer this back towards the holocaust images again, because those aren't the images that people were most upset about and were deemed too graphic to show publicly.

The university never specifies which images. They say ALL images including the ones of the holocaust. I'm going to keep hammering on that point. You cannot say that the exact same images are suddenly an affront to public dignity depending on the club which chooses to use them.

And you know that -- which is why you avoid talking about the obscenely graphic Rwandan genocide images.

Ahh ok. I fail to see anyone other then you has specified that the Rwandan Genocide photos are the only offensive ones. Please show me where the University says, "we don't like those Rwandan Genocide photos, you can keep the rest, but pull those ones."

No, they say they want the entire display turned inwards and that includes the holocaust signs. You have to defend the entire decision, Asher, and if you cannot, or find it distasteful, then stop carrying water for the administration and side with the prolife group against this arbitrary censorship.

PS: Man up and address my counterpoints rather than passively admitting defeat by not quoting them. You argue that protests cannot be censored, so you are in favour of child porn being displayed as part of NAMBLA protests? After all, how is child porn any worse than a decapitated three year old girl?

There is a difference between journalism and porn. Prolifers display the images because they want to end abortion. I've said that 3 or 4 times already.

[Asher]

You are a ****** and I'm too busy to respond.

[Nikolai]

Asher giving up.

Good job BK.

[Ben Kenobi]

I would LOVE it if the club tried to sue the SU.

You are aware that they have lost every time it's been tried?

You cannot ban a club because they are prolife.

Clubs agree to abide by university policies and bylaws.

The student union, by their own admission argues that the display is protected by the charter of rights and freedoms, ergo the display cannot be banned on campus. It's as simple as that. The club cannot go and say later on that the same display is illegal.

They broke those policies and bylaws and even broke criminal law (charged with trespassing).

How can students be charged with trespassing on their own campus? You might as well argue that students could be locked out of the classes that they paid for. It's a very bad precedent, and the student union should be fighting this decision tooth and nail. As it is, the university could claim that the student union itself is trespassing, and do the same to their building.

The SU is well within their rights to strip this club of their club status for breaking the agreement.

Charges are not the same as a conviction. The students have not broken their agreement until their court case with the university has gone through. That the student union would say the agreement is broken with a charge, that would shock me.

What rule have the students broken? I don't see how trespass is involved at all here, but then you are the one defending the university's case.

So tell me Asher, why is this trespass?

They were provided ample warning and ignored the warnings, as well. There's no legal ground for them to stand on.

It's their campus. They are entitled to book space and hold demonstrations. It's up to the university to prove trespass.

If they claim it's discrimination against their stance on the abortion issue, all the SU has to do is point to the other groups with avowed pro-life stances and protests: the Christian Students Association (CSA), the Chinese-Christian Students Association, the "Choose Life" club, and the others that all have pro-life opinions and literature on campus. It's clearly not the stance that is resulting in their revocation of status, but their inability to play by the same rules as everyone else.

First off, they are christian clubs.

I haven't heard of the choose life club. Tell me more about them.

As for the rules, can you show me any other club that must turn their signs inwards? Yes or no.