It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Student Sues College After Being Punished for Her Anti-Gay Language

page: 4
13
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 03:43 PM
link   
Free speech simply means you have the right to voice yourself. It does not equal freedom from consequences. There will always be consequences.




posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 03:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: tavi45
It sounds like she wasn't making any sort of real argument about anything. She just finds same sex attraction and sex perverse. I don't see how that fits in an academic setting. It's supposed to be informed debate not yelling of personal opinions. If you are discussing the rise of the Soviet Union and you just scream out "communists are disgusting monsters" that's not really constructive.


seems you are doing what you think she did, re-read article and come back to us.



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 03:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

the student wasn't in charge, she did exactly what the assignment was. to again as i quoted to BH



The lawsuit alleges the teacher violated her own syllabus, which called for "open minds" to examine "representations of a plethora of genders and sexualities." Instead, Pompeo says, she was accused of resorting to "hate speech," and the professor refused to grade her paper.


the way i readit, the teacher found her words and expressions offensive and called it hate speech. she did not even grade the paper. she refused to and suggested that the student drop the class.

when the student did exactly what she was told, and expressed her own feelings, just because you don't agree with them, is no reason to deny her a grade for a subject that she is taking and has paid money for.
when you do that you are saying that, i don't like your thoughts and i'm gonna hold that against you and withhold your grade.



edit on 17-10-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-10-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 04:13 PM
link   
few more cases on first amendment

en.wikipedia.org... interesting case and the origin of the fighting words limitation on freedom of speech

en.wikipedia.org... wiki on "fighting words"

en.wikipedia.org... another case related to the other two cases posted above.

en.wikipedia.org... case that established flag burning as freedom of speech

www.firstamendmentcenter.org...

caselaw.lp.findlaw.com... probably the most relevant to the OPs case but be warned its a long read in legal ease



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 04:27 PM
link   
www.dailynews724.com... -lesbianismrsquo-h275063.html

another article related to OP's case and the authors opinion on the matter


First Amendment Standards … The Court’s analysis of the merits of Plaintiff’s First Amendment claim involves three questions: (1) is Plaintiff speech protected speech? (2) in what type of forum did Plaintiff’s speech occur? and (3) do the justifications for restricting speech proffered by Defendants satisfy the First Amendment standard applicable to the type of forum in question…. The first two inquiries are not seriously in dispute. Defendants concede that Plaintiff’s speech is protected by the First Amendment and all parties agree that under governing Tenth Circuit precedent a university classroom is a nonpublic forum. Axson-Flynn v. Johnson, 356 F.3d 1277, 1285 (10th Cir. 2004).



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 07:57 PM
link   
a reply to: chishuppu

Aren't we all doing that? None of us read her paper. It's all speculation.

I'm bashing my opinion on attending college. Lots of really dumb people expressed low brow uninformed opinions. There are ways to critique things intelligently. The word perverse in relation to a disliked or hated group strikes me as most likely not an informed well written critique.

My opinion is as meaningless as anyone else's here. We lack the information relevant to make a solid case one way or the other.



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: tavi45

Also from reading about the movie it seems pretty tame by modern sensibilities. It's pretty much a standard romance movie ignoring the part where its lesbians. So most likely she's just homophobic

Again just opinion.



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 08:14 PM
link   
This girl just seems like a belligerent, nasty little bitch who is looking to use her malaise to cause trouble.

This is the sort of person we should all remember to keep the heck away from.



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Petros312

Shut the little snot up.

You are in school to learn.

If you disagree with a prof, then at least, be respectful and professional.

Loud-mouth bimbos gone ruin it for anyone else with a real issue.



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 09:05 PM
link   
About the judge: I think most judges try to be impartial, but they are human and I do feel they are influenced by their own beliefs, upbringing, and history.




In 2001, Armijo was nominated to the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico by President George W. Bush on September 4, 2001 to a new seat created by 114 Stat. 2762. Armijo was confirmed by the Senate on November 6, 2001 on a Senate vote and received her commission on November 12, 2001. She became Chief Judge of the court on October 1, 2012. en.m.wikipedia.org...



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 09:29 PM
link   
This film "Desert Hearts" is made in 1985 and set in the 1950s.

How perverse can it be?



The intimacy follows in a later scene when Charbonneau tracks Shaver to her downtown hotel room and initiates a long, erotic love scene which isn't at all pornographic or exploitative. The two women love one another, but one is after all an uptight distinguished author and the other, though equally intelligent, goes with the flow, as they say, and has been "kicked out of college for unnatural acts." www.imdb.com...



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 09:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
. . . when the student did exactly what she was told, and expressed her own feelings, just because you don't agree with them, is no reason to deny her a grade for a subject that she is taking and has paid money for.
when you do that you are saying that, i don't like your thoughts and i'm gonna hold that against you and withhold your grade.


So far we only have one side.



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 09:34 PM
link   
There is a difference between free speech and hate speech. Though I do not know what this woman's paper contained, I do agree that the professor should have graded it as non-biased as possible and maybe talked to her after class about how she might have misinterpreted what was being said. Pretty much falls on the professor either way. It's their job to give a subject + an assignment, and then grade according to how well the student understood the assignment according to the subject. I have had professors like this who push their personal agenda on a class of people who may or may not agree and then grade based on personal judgement. It's a farce to say the least and you basically end up writing for only what the professor wants to hear.



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 09:34 PM
link   
does any one else find it odd that she seems to be basing half of her case on Monica Pompeo's use of the word "Barren"? i mean they usually limit words that are likely to incite a riot or cause great offense and i don't see the fighting words clause applying to the word barren.

it may even be an uphill battle trying to use it for the word "perverse" as depending on definition used it can either come off as a personal opinion or a pretty offensive statement

www.merriam-webster.com...

: wrong or different in a way that others feel is strange or offensive
bold emphasis mine, so in that context it could appear she was describing how it made HER(pompeo) feel and such things tend to be relevant at least to supreme court

articles.latimes.com... review of the movie that she wrote the paper on that caused all of this from 1986(go way back machine) and the review says the book was different and i guess a bit better

www.courthousenews.com... and one more link that adds a few more words the teacher was offended by that i wont post here because of t and c



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 09:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: scghst1
I do agree that the professor should have graded it . . .


We do not know the facts here.

We only know what this student is claiming.



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 09:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

well yes and no, we also have the judges words.
to the best of my knowledge when a judge rules if a suit can go forward, they look at both sides arguments.
and she found that the university/professor did again to use her words.



questioned whether a "university can have a legitimate pedagogical interest in inviting students to engage in `incendiary' and provocative speech on a topic and then punishing a student because he or she did just that." "Simply because Plaintiff expressed views about homosexuality that some people may deem offensive does not derive her views of First Amendment protection,"


plus i'm sure there was other testimony from other students that they did in fact receive instruction to "engage in `incendiary' and provocative speech on a topic."

you have to remember that the Federal Courts are pretty hot on hate speech and that in order that, or for a civil rights violation to be brought forward, there would have to be other evidence to support it, other than just the plaintiffs word.


edit on 17-10-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-10-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 10:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: RalagaNarHallas

www.courthousenews.com... and one more link that adds a few more words the teacher was offended by that i wont post here because of t and c



There seems to be a whole lot more going on here then one professor "allegedly" interfering with free speech.

Reading down further in that article we find at least 2 other teacher/administrators (not sure) objecting to Monica's writings.



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 10:11 PM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

I do get it.

But, in discussing other court cases ------- a lot of stuff is said to make a case ------ then when it actually goes to trial there's a lot of back peddling.

Will be interesting case to follow.

edit on 17-10-2014 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 12:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Petros312

According to her lawyer, the premise of the law suit is that colleges are supposed to be places that encourage free speech and debate. Looks to me like her professor was debating and the student, Monica Pompeo, just wanted to blurt out her opinion as loud and rude as she could. It's yet another example of someone defining "free speech" as saying whatever you want with no consequences for what you say.


What do you mean "consequences" ???

The only speech that should have any disciplinary "consequences" is speech that incites violence!

The girl had every right to object to material that she found offensive and has every right to tell the professor to stick it up his/her ass!



posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 12:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: 8675309jenny

The only speech that should have any disciplinary "consequences" is speech that incites violence!





She told Ms. Pompeo that the language used in her paper was the kind of language that would incite violence and endanger people's lives," the complaint states.

www.courthousenews.com...




top topics



 
13
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join