• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Split Thread Students should be punished for protesting

Hercules56 said:
Yes, the Department of Justice (DOJ) can institute fines, but it's typically in the context of enforcing federal laws and regulations, not for general revenue generation.
Click to expand...
You sure about that? The DoJ can take people to court where the court imposes the fines if any. It's part of the separation of powers.
 
Hercules56 said:
Jailed? Thats if the college wants to charge you with a crime. Its their right.



Yes, you could be charged for that.



Someone told you that civil disobedience comes without any consequences? LOLLLLOL!!!




Sorry chap, but civil disobedience sometimes breaks the law, and there are consequences for that.

This is Civil Disobedience and Non-violent Protest 101. You were supposed to read the manual before participating.
Click to expand...
There are quite a few false dichotomies in your posts.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger said:
And why would civil disobedience including political protests not be considered part of learning and civil activity?
Click to expand...
Blocking campus access to students based on their perceived political beliefs and religion, is not something colleges should encourage or allow.

Disrupting classes due to the curriculum, or disrupting club activities due to the topic or guest speaker, is not something colleges should encourage or allow.

Students should have the right to make their political beliefs heard. Even offensive ones. But they don't have the right to decide that parts of campus are off limits to Zionists, Jews, Conservatives, white people, etc.

Such behavior should bring harsh sanctions.

Or were you under the ridiculous impression that there are no consequences for civil disobedience? Never heard of Martin Luther King?



Put this another way: if I'm paying 30 ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ thousand dollars a year for my kid to go to college, he damn better have the right to go to class and listen to his instructor uninterrupted by hooligans. And he better have the right to go to club activities uninterrupted by protesters.

If a college is not going to guarantee students the right to an education, and the right to engage in extracurricular activities free from harassment, I am sending my kid and my money to another college.
 
Last edited:
dirtywick said:
well as we are finding out nationally, free speech isn’t really that important to anyone.
Click to expand...
Your freedom of speech ends where my nose begins.

In other words "no, your freedom is not more important than my freedom. We both have rights, and you don't get to trample on my rights just because you have something to say, or you don't like what I think".
 
dirtywick said:
is that a quote i should have heard somewhere?
Click to expand...
Your freedom ends where my nose begins" is a metaphorical statement emphasizing that individual liberties are limited by the potential for harm or infringement upon the rights and personal space of others. The most recognized phrasing is "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins," a quote often attributed to Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., illustrating that while one has the right to act freely, those actions must not violate another's freedom or physical integrity.



For example you obviously have freedom of speech in the public square on public property. But that does not mean you have the right to go into a high school classroom and interrupt science class by reciting the entire US Constitution.
 
Last edited:
but that’s not the phrase you quoted.
"no, your freedom is not more important than my freedom. We both have rights, and you don't get to trample on my rights just because you have something to say, or you don't like what I think".
Click to expand...
 
Hercules56 said:
Your freedom ends where my nose begins" is a metaphorical statement emphasizing that individual liberties are limited by the potential for harm or infringement upon the rights and personal space of others. The most recognized phrasing is "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins," a quote often attributed to Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., illustrating that while one has the right to act freely, those actions must not violate another's freedom or physical integrity.



For example you obviously have freedom of speech in the public square on public property. But that does not mean you have the right to go into a high school classroom and interrupt science class by reciting the entire US Constitution.
Click to expand...
Citation, please for the italised text.
 
Blocking campus access to students based on their perceived political beliefs and religion, is not something colleges should encourage or allow.

Disrupting classes due to the curriculum, or disrupting club activities due to the topic or guest speaker, is not something colleges should encourage or allow.

Students should have the right to make their political beliefs heard. Even offensive ones. But they don't have the right to decide that parts of campus are off limits to Zionists, Jews, Conservatives, white people, etc.

Such behavior should bring harsh sanctions.
Click to expand...
Is this ^ exactly what the discussion is about?

Or were you under the ridiculous impression that there are no consequences for civil disobedience? Never heard of Martin Luther King?
Click to expand...
This is one of those false dichotomies I mentioned above.
 
Hercules56 said:
www.bozemandailychronicle.com

Right to personal choice ends 6 feet from my nose

As I try to understand the reasons that others in our community and across the country choose not to wear a mask in public places, I am left concerned about
www.bozemandailychronicle.com www.bozemandailychronicle.com
Click to expand...
Thank you. It is considered good practice to attribute the source when quoting from it, but you know that. Accidents happen.

Anyway, I am unable to access the source of the quote, as they don't follow GDPR rules (as is their right). However, I see from the URL that this was a 'letter to the editor' of the Boseman Daily Chronicle. I am unfamiliar with this publication, is their 'letters to the editor' section generally held to be authoritative on these issues?
 
Last edited:
junkshop said:
Thank you. It is considered good practice to attribute the source when quoting from it, but you know that. Accidents happen.

Anyway, I am unable to access the source of the quote, as they don't follow GDPR rules (as is their right). However, I see from the URL that this was a 'letter to the editor' of the Boseman Daily Chronicle. I am unfamiliar with this publication, is their 'letters to the editor' section generally held to be authoritative on these issues?
Click to expand...
In June 1919 the Harvard Law Review published an article by legal philosopher Zechariah Chafee, Jr. titled “Freedom of Speech in War Time” and it contained a version of the expression spoken by an anonymous judge:<a href="https://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/10/15/liberty-fist-nose/#f07e77d7-b5e3-495b-a414-430aafd9533b">2</a>


Each side takes the position of the man who was arrested for swinging his arms and hitting another in the nose, and asked the judge if he did not have a right to swing his arms in a free country. “Your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man’s nose begins.”
Click to expand...
 
Nitpick; how can freedom of speech end where my nose begins? Your rights end when they impinge of mine, but not freedom of speech - you may tell me that I'm wrong, and counter my arguments, but I can keep saying what I think, however much you disagree, as long as I am not breaking any laws.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom