More proof of Islamic deference at American Universities (Muslim Privilege at Rutgers Univ.)

a reply to: GlutenFree

Wait, so now you are Palestinian? You said you weren't earlier so what gives? My BS flag has just been raised.

We have found out that if a one world government is coming , what the one world judicial system and the one world religion will be

#, Rutgers was probably more scared of the offended Muslims going all 'jihadi' more than they were worried about a Christain chick ranting on Facebook.

a reply to: Swills

I am not currently residing where I am normally from ( no I am not in Palestine) I didn't say Jewish army I said some army dude .. what is a jewish army anyway I though army wasn't that biased you can openly hail to Satan for all you want.. now how much time did we waste here - too much what did we achieve with this conversation fvck all

My reply to OP was that yeah it's crappy I hear you it's the same with other religions but too .. Anyway everyone have a great weekend . Swill I said sorry and ignore me .. loved the gif so that was the only thing worth while here again apology

a reply to: chuck258

I did a search for the Gleaner and found this site:

goo.gl...

Looks like its a student run newspaper.

So it seems like one decision came from the actual University (library) and the other came from a group of students which may explain the inconsistency.

In today's environment, we are quick to blame "White privilege" or reverse racism.

Sometimes its neither.

You Americans are getting awefully spiteful of muslims, of course it isnt anything to do with donald trump of course...

funny how the narrative on this forum follows american foreign policy one would have thought there were

goverment shills on this forum.

Well im off to bomb children in syria wih US made drones, its a new command and conquer game, BYE!

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Well for one Muhammad isn't supposed to be depicted and secondly alcohol is off limits to Muslims and depicting him in a bar could be an implication that he is drinking.

Not saying there is no double standard here because there definitely is, but to say the Muhammad thing isn't offensive is not true. Both cases should have been treated equally but unfortunately they were not, it does seem as though the Muslims were getting some sort of preferential treatment which isn't fair at all.

Both were offensive to people of faith, and both should have been treated equally. Either allow it all under free speech, or allow neither. A school could prohibit anything of the sort, on the ground that it is causing a bad learning environment. That said, that wouldn't tech much about free speech. Either way, I agree, they need to be consistent.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

What case would they have exactly? Both were eventually removed even if one was removed faster than the other.

What happened here was wrong but I don't see how a lawsuit could be made out of it.

In this case, there was discrimination against the Christian students and faculty, because their beliefs were not treated equally wit those of students with other beliefs. When schools have "safe zones" based on race, and then a school does this, it looks like a case to me. The point would be to bring more attention to the issue, in such a case, not to gain anything else. Fairness would be the goal.