Quashing Offensive Memes at UVa
Share this article
ADVERTISEMENT
(comments below)
Comments
Comments
8 responses to “Quashing Offensive Memes at UVa”
-
“During the upcoming weekend” sounds like a very specific flyer attack expected to result from very specific planned “solicitations by national organizations.” What the hell?! Obviously the University knows more than they are saying. They should come clean about it, in the name of transparent policing if not free discussion of ideas.
-
This was written by the Chief Operating Officer of the entire University. Just dwell on that simple fact for a while. What does that tell you?
-
What a cheap, tawdry, and cowardly act, trying to conjure up victims from thin air among young students at UVA. Low rent performance art from UVA’s Chief Operating Officer, no less. Now we know where Jackie came from. And last spring and summer’s conjured up violence in Charlottesville, Virginia. Sullivan and her gang are going out with quite a bang. Or is it a whimper?
-
I’m with Reed on the absurdity of Pat Hogan being the Chief Hall Monitor of bulletin boards. With a salary of $472,800 I presumed he’d been hired for other skills. As for free speech/offensive speech, pinning something to a bulletin is, by its very nature, temporary. Am I the only person who has removed a flyer from bulletin board, exercising my freedom of expression? It’s almost as if this school WANTS to be in the spotlight for one embarrassing reason or the next.
-
If anyone wants to better understand what likely afflicts UVA’s chief operating officer, and what surely afflicts the campuses of many of today’s universities, and what has afflicted UVA in spades for several years now, I highly recommend this just published book:
Lost Connections: Uncovering the real causes of depression – and the Unexpected Solutions” by Johann Hari.
The book ‘s title is some what misleading. This guy is talking about not only depression but also the rampant angst and anxiety that afflicts so many Americans today of all kinds, including so many kids on college campuses. I believe our colleges and universities have much to answer for as they are one of major pushers of these mental health problems. That include people like UVA’s current Chief Operating Officer, and his boss Teresa Sullivan.
-
-
-
Not too hard to imagine.. some really offensive posters .. like a noose with some white supremacist words.. or geeze.. I can just imagine on a gender basis really bad stuff.
I know this sounds counter to the folks who claim that anyone can say or provide posters of anything – anywhere they please… as 1st amendment but it’s just not true.
You can’t stand up in a courtroom and give your own speech.. you will be escorted out.
You won’t be able to take a really offensive poster into a meeting of BOS.
I can go on and on but you can color this both ways… as “censorship”or the reality of what “free speech” really is and really is not.
Here is an example… and those protesters were denied access to a public cemetery and moved away from it:
http://images.gawker.com/17vccgu5jggq0jpg/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636.jpg
-
New rules equal decriminalizing turnstile jumping, pot, almost all juvenile offenses, knowingly exposing some to HIV (California), etc.
But posting certain fliers deemed inappropriate or harmful equals a call to 911.
It would be a bit different if the message was to contact the administration to check out the flier. -
Larry, as an American you have pretty broad freedom to utter or display offensive speech. See what the United States Courts say about it. http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/what-does
Courts have permitted regulation of the time, place and manner of speech when four tests are passed. They are:
1. Does the regulation serve an important governmental interest?
2. Is the government interest served by the regulation unrelated to the suppression of a particular message?
3. Is the regulation narrowly tailored to serve the government’s interest?
4. Does the regulation leave open ample alternative means for communicating messages?I’m not sure posting a flyer on public college bulletin board advocating white or black supremacy can be prohibited. Nor could a flyer that calls for deportation of all illegal immigrants or for a total amnesty. A flyer that calls for violence is something else. One that depicted a noose around a black person’s neck probably is a call to violence that can be removed. A poster that displayed a noose and argued for capital punishment by hanging should not be touched by any government official.
As far as courtroom or board of supervisors meeting, they could likely prohibit all banners and signs as being disruptive to the orderly operation of government, but not allow some and prohibit others based on the content of their speech.
Despite what the left and California government officials say, we don’t have a right not to be offended. I hope the US DoJ really cracks down on California.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.