UT gets warning to protect Jews

#76
#76
C-south said:
Not exclusively. You also can’t set up a range in your backyard and shoot at all hours even if you’re outside of city limits and within a certain distance from your neighbors. It’s not about safety or “threat concerns” but more or less annoying everyone around you. Kind of like a noise ordinance. That said would it not be considered a threat concern when terrorist sympathizers intimidate, threaten, and hinder a certain group of people?
Click to expand...
Ok. Let's run with that idea of annoyance. When a group is protesting peaceably, wearing masks, how does that constitute an annoyance to you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol and NashVol11
#78
#78
C-south said:
It doesn’t. Is that the argument?
Click to expand...
I thought it was. We got into a free speech - protest / prohibit masks discussion. And we ended up here where rights are conditional based on percieved threat, safety, annoyance.

I think we are using protest very loosely when riot, vandalism, theft, are more accurate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, LouderVol, Smokey123 and 1 other person
#79
#79
C-south said:
... That said would it not be considered a threat concern when terrorist sympathizers intimidate, threaten, and hinder a certain group of people?
Click to expand...

I'm no Constitutional expert, but I could see where publicly whipping a crowd into a frenzy, screaming "death to Jews!" could be construed to have created an environment that could substantially interfere with Jews feeling safe to get an education, based on their race.


Harassment is distinct from “hate speech” because it goes beyond mere expression of opinion and targets a particular person for harm. The threshold for speech rising to the level of illegal harassment is generally quite high. Anti-harassment laws often refer to speech directed at a particular person, based on the victim’s race, religion, or other group characteristic, and which has the purpose or effect of substantially interfering with, for example, a student’s educational performance or creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive environment.

These exceptions to the protections of the First Amendment are very narrow, but they are well established. Civil libertarians and supporters of free expression–including protest, writing and art–can and should support the right to express hateful opinions, but can draw a clear line that no one has a right to incite a riot or to harass another person.
Click to expand...
 
#80
#80
Orange_Crush said:
I'm no Constitutional expert, but I could see where publicly whipping a crowd into a frenzy, screaming "death to Jews!" could be construed to have created an environment that could substantially interfere with Jews feeling safe to get an education, based on their race.
Click to expand...

I’m no fan of the term “hate speech”. If someone wants to hate something that should be their prerogative just be mindful of where and how you do it.
 
#81
#81
C-south said:
I’m no fan of the term “hate speech”. If someone wants to hate something that should be their prerogative just be mindful of where and how you do it.
Click to expand...
I'm not a fan of that term, and never have been. I'm pretty libertarian. We each have freedoms that will generally end at the border of someone else's rights.

I'm just trying to wade through ignorant outrage and actual law.

We've heard that President barring a news agency from the privilege of the oval office is a free speech issue, and it's not.

We seem to be hearing that the constraint of any protest speech is a free speech issue, but obviously if the expression of that speech legitimately interferes with someone else's liberties, it's not a speech/opinion/expression issue, legally speaking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#82
#82
utvolpj said:
You should stop using words you don't understand. It really makes you look foolish (.)

There's nothing new about free speech. Masks, red hats, yellow shirts, etc are all covered with plenty of court cases to prove it. A mask (or maga hat if you want another example) absolutely is covered and not dependent on someone's fragile feelings. If you're concerned with something illegal then that's absolutely covered in our law as well.
Click to expand...


Nobody is confusing a red hat or a yellow shirt with a mask/facial/hood covering to violate/harass a targeted group. Nice reach though in your fight for antisemitism and tolerated racism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#88
#88
Majors said:
Nobody is confusing a red hat or a yellow shirt with a mask/facial/hood covering to violate/harass a targeted group. Nice reach though in your fight for antisemitism and tolerated racism.
Click to expand...
Just an FYI, when you've reached the end of your argument and all that's left is to call someone a racist/bigot/antisemite then you've lost. At this point you're clearly discussing an idea you have no clue about what it is or how it works. You're attributing made up ideas and distorting posts to the point where the original idea is nowhere to be found. I'm guessing that's done on purpose when the idea is so ridiculous that you can't follow it any longer but ego won't allow you to quit. Here's your permission
 
#89
#89
utvolpj said:
Just an FYI, when you've reached the end of your argument and all that's left is to call someone a racist/bigot/antisemite then you've lost. At this point you're clearly discussing an idea you have no clue about what it is or how it works. You're attributing made up ideas and distorting posts to the point where the original idea is nowhere to be found. I'm guessing that's done on purpose when the idea is so ridiculous that you can't follow it any longer but ego won't allow you to quit. Here's your permission
Click to expand...
Sorry guy, your line in the sand was drawn weeks ago and snuck back in today. Seems to be a pattern on your end that has been exposed.
 
#92
#92
Majors said:
Sorry guy, your line in the sand was drawn weeks ago and snuck back in today. Seems to be a pattern on your end that has been exposed.
Click to expand...
You simply lack the brain power to separate any criticism of israel or US policy towards Israel from antisemitism. Blame your parents or limited schooling for that, not me
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11 and LouderVol
#95
#95
utvolpj said:
You simply lack the brain power to separate any criticism of israel or US policy towards Israel from antisemitism. Blame your parents or limited schooling for that, not me
Click to expand...
Or just calling tolerated racism out in real time. Makes sense to blame my parents, they are old guard democrats who are forgotten. Adjust your hood when you type, you forgot a period earlier.
 
#100
#100
BowlBrother85 said:
Also, Trump's inclusion of "NO MASKS!" in all caps was a bizarre non sequitur at the end of his statement, if he was referring to COVID-related masks. Was he talking about Muslim women wearing hijabs? I would hope not, but that would make more sense than bringing up COVID in a statement discussing anti-Semitism. Weird.

.... and does the Department of Education have the jurisdiction to expel students as Trump threatened?

There are times when Trump talks very much like an autocrat.
Click to expand...
Action speaks louder than words. Watch what he does. Don't listen to what his opponents say he is doing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thunder Good-Oil
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top