College Student Wins Right to Talk about Jesus and the Bible in Graduation Speech

Apr 2011
14,486
5,638
My mother's womb, of course.
How sure are you that wasn't her intention all along, hmmm?
Now you are making up a conspiracy theory, which are more than, as Michael Barkun calls them, evil doers plotting to achieve a malevolent end.They're also logical fallacies because they appeal to hidden knowledge that we can't verify.

I don't think a lawsuit against the school is necessary.
That's a relief. Aboutenough wants to sue the school just so he can see if his conspiracy theory is true or not.

What is necessary is for the school to reprimand the faculty member for her gross error in judgment and abuse of authority.
Again, what makes you think the school didn't already?
 
Jan 2007
7,541
480
Irrelevant
What makes you think the school didn't reprimand her?

Glad to hear it.
I think that reprimands on faculty members bear on that faculty member's tenure in a university. If that faculty member was reprimanded, then its all good as far as I'm concerned. This situation isn't a slap-on-the-hand situation as you and your friends would have everyone believe.
 
Jan 2007
7,541
480
Irrelevant
Now you are making up a conspiracy theory, which are more than, as Michael Barkun calls them, evil doers plotting to achieve a malevolent end.They're also logical fallacies because they appeal to hidden knowledge that we can't verify.
Actually, it is you who are trying to drag this discussion into a conspiracy theory. It doesn't matter whether the faculty member knowingly or ignorantly issued that directive. Either way, she ought to be reprimanded.

That's a relief. Aboutenough wants to sue the school just so he can see if his conspiracy theory is true or not.
I can't say I blame him for wanting to sue. After all, injury has been alleged for merely enduring a moment of silence in a school event. How much more in this situation where a school censors a graduation speech.

Again, what makes you think the school didn't already?
Because the reprimand wasn't mentioned in the article. Had there been a reprimand, you couldn't possibly make light of the faculty member's gross ignorance and abuse of authority, now, could you?
 
Apr 2011
14,486
5,638
My mother's womb, of course.
It is a mistake because it is persecution -- a form of harassment that seeks to curtail another's free speech.
Persecution involves conspiracy. If a drunk driver crashes into a Christian driver whom he doesn't know, his insurance company will have to pay for the damages, but he wasn't persecuting the Christian.

If the driver plotted the crash as a means of targeting Christians, that is persecution, and his insurance company will also have to pay for the damages.
 

Djinn

Council Hall
Dec 2007
48,641
34,510
Pennsylvania, USA
Clearly, you are misinformed.

Religious student organizations are accredited in state universities and public schools. They hold religious activities on school grounds. They publish newsletters paid for by the school. All these is permissible as long as such facilities and monies are made available to other student organizations. That is what freedom of religion means.

And as your scotus explicitly stated in the majority opinion -- the how and where of speech cannot be overcome by what a jury may find outrageous. This is more than being a captive audience since the snyders were already arguing for their right to privacy.
It's more complicated than that. Schools have been ordered to cease allowing local churches to use school marquees for promoting church events. They have been prohibited from distributing church literature on school grounds. You make it sound simple - it's not. There are a LOT of restrictions, and I'm glad they exist.
 
Jan 2007
7,541
480
Irrelevant
It's more complicated than that. Schools have been ordered to cease allowing local churches to use school marquees for promoting church events. They have been prohibited from distributing church literature on school grounds. You make it sound simple - it's not. There are a LOT of restrictions, and I'm glad they exist.
Sigh.

We are talking about an INDIVIDUAL STUDENT speaking about her PERSONAL EXPERIENCES, in a commencement speech which she was ENTITLED to give.

How exactly is your post relevant, hmmmm? It isn't really that complicated. It only seems complicated to you because you are trying to defend something that isn't defensible to begin with.
 
Feb 2010
26,785
27,688
Sunny Bournemouth, Dorset
Sigh.

We are talking about an INDIVIDUAL STUDENT speaking about her PERSONAL EXPERIENCES, in a commencement speech which she was ENTITLED to give.

How exactly is your post relevant, hmmmm? It isn't really that complicated. It only seems complicated to you because you are trying to defend something that isn't defensible to begin with.
Would you permit a mentally ill student to bray their delusions to their peers and their parents? They don't want or need to hear it.
 

Blueneck

Former Staff
Jun 2007
52,040
37,716
Ohio
Sigh.

We are talking about an INDIVIDUAL STUDENT speaking about her PERSONAL EXPERIENCES, in a commencement speech which she was ENTITLED to give.

How exactly is your post relevant, hmmmm? It isn't really that complicated. It only seems complicated to you because you are trying to defend something that isn't defensible to begin with.
So can students talk about how Satan changed their PERSONAL lives for the better?
 
Jan 2007
7,541
480
Irrelevant
Would you permit a mentally ill student to bray their delusions to their peers and their parents? They don't want or need to hear it.
What???? You have a right not to hear???? And the government guarantees that you will not hear the things you do not want or need to hear???? And just because you do not want or need to hear something, does it mean that everyone else do not want or need to hear????

And you think freedom of speech works that way????